Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20220906204301.3736813-1-dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
 <20220906204301.3736813-2-dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> <20220906211628.6u4hbpn4shjcvqel@pali>
 <Yxe7CJnIT5AiUilL@google.com> <20220906214114.vj3v32dzwxz6uqik@pali>
 <YxfBKkqce/IQQLk9@google.com> <20220906220901.p2c44we7i4c35uvx@pali>
 <YxfMkzW+5W3Hm1dU@google.com> <CACRpkdZh0BF1jjPB4FSTg12_=aOpK-kMiOFD+A8p5unr1+4+Ow@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMRc=MdrX5Pz1d-SM2PPikEYw0zJBe6GCdr4pEfgBLMi1J9PAQ@mail.gmail.com> <YyHQdN14bI4WeCKp@sol>
In-Reply-To: <YyHQdN14bI4WeCKp@sol>
From:   Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
Date:   Wed, 14 Sep 2022 15:36:54 +0200
Message-ID: <CACRpkda=BKafP7W4SPm5La2WtqdNvjcjHoLp9oD8Zq5PYHCweA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] PCI: mvebu: switch to using gpiod API
To:     Kent Gibson <warthog618@gmail.com>
Cc:     Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl>,
        Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>,
        =?UTF-8?Q?Pali_Roh=C3=A1r?= <pali@kernel.org>,
        Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@linaro.org>,
        Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@kernel.org>,
        Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@bootlin.com>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
        =?UTF-8?Q?Krzysztof_Wilczy=C5=84ski?= <kw@linux.com>,
        linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Sep 14, 2022 at 3:00 PM Kent Gibson <warthog618@gmail.com> wrote:

> The key distinction is whether you are describing a physical or logical
> value/state.
> High/low should be reserved for physical.
> Active/inactive describe logical.
>
> (I personally dislike "deassert" as it is a manufactured word that feels
> very awkward.)

I would certainly trust anyone native Anglo-Saxon to say what is the
best word here, so I will happily fold on this.

> Changing gpiod_set_value() to gpiod_set_state(), while leaving
> gpiod_set_raw_value() as is, does not reduce confusion - at least not for
> me.

Sloppy of me, certainly these would need to be renamed
too. The _raw being high/low and the logic accessors
active/inactive.

Yours,
Linus Walleij