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;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1606404819-30647-1-git-send-email-bongsu.jeon@samsung.com> <20201126170154.GA4978@kozik-lap>
In-Reply-To: <20201126170154.GA4978@kozik-lap>
From:   Bongsu Jeon <bs.jeon87@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 27 Nov 2020 07:53:32 +0900
Message-ID: <CAEx-X7esGyZ2QiTGbE1H7M7z1dqT47awmqrOtN+p0FbwtwfPOg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/3] nfc: s3fwrn5: use signed integer for parsing
 GPIO numbers
To:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
Cc:     Bongsu Jeon <bongsu.jeon2@gmail.com>,
        Krzysztof Opasiak <k.opasiak@samsung.com>,
        linux-nfc@lists.01.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 2:06 AM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Nov 27, 2020 at 12:33:37AM +0900, bongsu.jeon2@gmail.com wrote:
> > From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
> >
> > GPIOs - as returned by of_get_named_gpio() and used by the gpiolib - are
> > signed integers, where negative number indicates error.  The return
> > value of of_get_named_gpio() should not be assigned to an unsigned int
> > because in case of !CONFIG_GPIOLIB such number would be a valid GPIO.
> >
> > Fixes: c04c674fadeb ("nfc: s3fwrn5: Add driver for Samsung S3FWRN5 NFC Chip")
> > Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>
>
> Why do you send my patch?
>

I think that your patch should be applied before refactoring for this driver.
So, I applied your patch to net-next branch and included your patch at
my patch list.
Is this the wrong process?

> Best regards,
> Krzysztof