Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
IronPort-SDR: kPO62fZkwfzYhdSQ0dNB85ynMgaYXz1hKWvKIUWeMMTwx9POTo8nOVgLI0RQSyGTwtbEgBSg0Q
 +C5kzvq2/j3g==
IronPort-SDR: u749v4INZv0nb2WLsGJ89vgi00gipbviohUiUYv71p9n1iqJxIzmd12RqNVm2/xYLH+N+9oTR0
 /7xoZh4vZj2w==
Date:   Thu, 10 Sep 2020 17:18:15 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
To:     Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>
Cc:     Kent Gibson <warthog618@gmail.com>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 00/20] gpio: cdev: add uAPI v2
Message-ID: <20200910141815.GW1891694@smile.fi.intel.com>
References: <20200827140020.159627-1-warthog618@gmail.com>
 <CACRpkdZZMbfpKy4gcfAzNq53LkYLcL9wm3Qtzyj_K8vkUW9RfQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMpxmJXRY2wqqN3SzfJN+QTWAHYSYz4vEjLKWU82Y=PAmcm=5w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200827224742.GA3714@sol>
 <CACRpkdZroNFFsHoBHUFTUUQij7nOcPQiXP-567+fH-Xerv=L4w@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200829013532.GA5905@sol>
 <CAMpxmJWjPzueMeKopo7qFke05CEePVD4YGbUiN7b_STKoYt0ZQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20200910140949.GV1891694@smile.fi.intel.com>
 <CAMpxmJVG+0ndrnNODv=niNtULBBtGJi+R7LKRh6R1Kex+ef_Cw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAMpxmJVG+0ndrnNODv=niNtULBBtGJi+R7LKRh6R1Kex+ef_Cw@mail.gmail.com>
Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 04:12:08PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 4:09 PM Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 01, 2020 at 11:28:13AM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > > On Sat, Aug 29, 2020 at 3:35 AM Kent Gibson <warthog618@gmail.com> wrote:

...

> > > I personally like v6 more. The code is more elegant and we've also
> > > tried limiting GPIO chardev features before and now we're doing v2 so
> > > let's not make the same mistake twice. :)
> > >
> > > I'll try to review v6 in detail later today.
> >
> > Let me briefly review to this. Can you remind which patch has a top level
> > description of what features are provided in comparison to uAPI v1?
> > (Btw, do we have some kind of comparison table?)
> 
> We are now at v8 for this series. The cover letter contains a lot of
> info and patch 4/20 defining the uAPI header explains v2 even more. I
> think these are the most important parts. Any implementation details
> can be fixed later as opposed to the API itself.

Right, thanks for pointers!

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko