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;
Date:   Thu, 15 Sep 2022 17:30:24 +0800
From:   Kent Gibson <warthog618@gmail.com>
To:     Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
Cc:     Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl>,
        Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>,
        Pali =?iso-8859-1?Q?Roh=E1r?= <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>,
        Krzysztof =?utf-8?Q?Wilczy=C5=84ski?= <kw@linux.com>,
        linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] PCI: mvebu: switch to using gpiod API
Message-ID: <YyLwsOBXv9jRw/+n@sol>
References: <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>
 <YyKMsyI961Mo1EQE@sol>
 <CACRpkdYB6dZf4TBhfXB2Z5E2PJ46ctAM_QKLiW-fykbCopcVGQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CACRpkdYB6dZf4TBhfXB2Z5E2PJ46ctAM_QKLiW-fykbCopcVGQ@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Sep 15, 2022 at 10:51:02AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 15, 2022 at 4:23 AM Kent Gibson <warthog618@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > After sleeping on this, I'm even more in disagreement with renaming
> > value to state.
> 
> OK let's not do that then.
> 
> > OTOH, I totally agree with the addition of GPIOD_ACTIVE/INACTIVE to be
> > used for the logical cases, and even a script to apply it globally.
> > Ideally that script would change both the calls to the logical functions
> > to use ACTIVE/INACTIVE, and the physical to HIGH/LOW.
> 
> OK we have consensus on this.
> 
> > Introducing enums for those, and changing the function signatures to
> > use those rather than int makes sense to me too.
> 
> Either they can be enum or defined to bool true/false. Not really
> sure what is best. But intuitively enum "feels better" for me.
> 

Enums work for me - especially if the goal is to differentiate
logical from physical - there should be a distinct enum for each.

> > Though I'm not sure
> > why that has to wait until after all users are changed to the new macros.
> > Would that generate lint warnings?
> 
> I rather want it all to happen at once. One preparatory commit
> adding the new types and one sed script to refactor the whole
> lot. Not gradual switchover.
> 
> The reason is purely administrative: we have too many refactorings
> lagging behind, mainly the GPIO descriptors that have been
> lagging behind for what is it? 5 years? 10? GPIO irqchips also dragged
> out for way too long. We can't keep doing things gradually like
> this, it takes too much time and effort.
> 
> I don't want any more "in-transition-indefinitely" stuff in the GPIO
> subsystem if I can avoid it.
> 
> Therefore I would advice to switch it all over at the end of a merge
> window and be done with it.
> 

Agreed - do it all at once.  My question was specific to the change of the
function signatures to using enums - what is to prevent us doing that
before running the sed script, and have the script switch usage over to
the enums?

Cheers,
Kent.