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: <20221020014426.188667-1-xiangyang3@huawei.com>
 <CAMRc=Md6nseghBwfiRCL0KQ1BJ0WE7MH9QENf=HdJdnC1Xz1Fg@mail.gmail.com> <Y1FSRJC9s+7cvJI3@smile.fi.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <Y1FSRJC9s+7cvJI3@smile.fi.intel.com>
From:   Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl>
Date:   Thu, 20 Oct 2022 16:30:27 +0200
Message-ID: <CAMRc=Mc-BvPRnORT+bm8LL5H3eG5-AOsN1fAaizXdhjZ=2E7xQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] gpiolib: acpi: Use METHOD_NAME__AEI macro for acpi_walk_resources
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Cc:     Xiang Yang <xiangyang3@huawei.com>,
        mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com, linus.walleij@linaro.org,
        linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Oct 20, 2022 at 3:51 PM Andy Shevchenko
<andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 20, 2022 at 03:23:27PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 20, 2022 at 3:48 AM Xiang Yang <xiangyang3@huawei.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Using the METHOD_NAME__AEI macro instead of using "_AEI" directly.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Xiang Yang <xiangyang3@huawei.com>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c | 2 +-
> > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c
> > > index a7d2358736fe..064ba5150fd4 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c
> > > @@ -512,7 +512,7 @@ void acpi_gpiochip_request_interrupts(struct gpio_chip *chip)
> > >         if (ACPI_FAILURE(status))
> > >                 return;
> > >
> > > -       acpi_walk_resources(handle, "_AEI",
> > > +       acpi_walk_resources(handle, METHOD_NAME__AEI,
> > >                             acpi_gpiochip_alloc_event, acpi_gpio);
> >
> > This line dates back to 2018 so why -next in your PATCH tag?
>
> This means "for Linux next cycle". It has roots in the net subsystem where
> it's a requirement to mark each patch either net or net-next, because they
> have a huge traffic of patches.
>
> > That being said - patch applied (unless Andy wants to take it directly).
>
> I think I will take it. Care to provide your tag?
>

Just take it, I will back it out.

Bartosz