Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.38 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.38;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20231011120830.49324-1-brgl@bgdev.pl> <20231011120830.49324-32-brgl@bgdev.pl>
 <ZSbTXz6aEdMxG4Y/@smile.fi.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <ZSbTXz6aEdMxG4Y/@smile.fi.intel.com>
From:   Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl>
Date:   Thu, 12 Oct 2023 21:43:38 +0200
Message-ID: <CAMRc=Mfyq=QG_xiEpL5wXB+sWwmnw30wWdRy4qm2xG7x4emiFQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 31/62] pinctrl: remove pinctrl_gpio_request()
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Cc:     Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 6:55=E2=80=AFPM Andy Shevchenko
<andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 02:07:59PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>
> >
> > There are no more users of pinctrl_gpio_request() so remove it.
>
> My question was and still is why can't we preserve most of the code?
> It seems with changing a prototype to a new one and using a temporary var=
iable
> will reduce the diff noise quite a lot.
>
> Another question is can we actually derive old functions from _new ones?
>
> Like
>
> foo_new(struct gpio_chip *gc, unsigned int offset)
> {
>         ...real implementation...
> }
>
> foo(unsigned gpio)
> {
>         ...something to get gpio chip and offset...
>         foo_new(gc, offset);
> }
>
> ?

Why would we do it? This is irrelevant for the final outcome.

Bart

>
> --
> With Best Regards,
> Andy Shevchenko
>
>