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:   Fri, 2 Jun 2023 19:34:16 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
To:     Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>,
        linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] gpiolib: Do not unexport GPIO on freeing
Message-ID: <ZHoaCGTHvAJAWro8@smile.fi.intel.com>
References: <20230602162258.63853-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
 <ZHoYzFPNrwwNpm93@smile.fi.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ZHoYzFPNrwwNpm93@smile.fi.intel.com>
Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Jun 02, 2023 at 07:29:00PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 02, 2023 at 07:22:58PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > Since the legacy exporting is gone with 2f804aca4832 ("gpiolib:
> > Kill unused GPIOF_EXPORT and Co") there is no need to unexport
> > GPIO on freeing. Remove that call.

> > Note, the other users of this functionality do that explicitly,
> > except one SH boardfile which doesn't free GPIO anyways, so it

Actually OMAP3 as well with the same idea, once requested those never freed.
Bart, should I update the commit message?

> > is safe to drop the call.
> 
> Note, that this might be squashed with the above mentioned commit, because
> I haven't checked current users I didn't do the removal in that patch.
> 
> But this will probably needs rebase which is not good thing process wise.
> So, just my 2 cents in case.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko