Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-61245-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=139.178.88.99;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20240211101421.166779-1-warthog618@gmail.com> <CAHp75VeSLvrxMOARDBHBJ5VGVR-Jv-7saxjJiN-NOPMyTwit3Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <20240211231321.GA4748@rigel>
In-Reply-To: <20240211231321.GA4748@rigel>
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2024 11:28:54 +0200
Message-ID: <CAHp75VddjcLaRqugKuk+eejYx_0AHVL4SjYcdh7zUKDj8SpcQw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpio: uapi: clarify default_values being logical
To: Kent Gibson <warthog618@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, brgl@bgdev.pl, 
	linus.walleij@linaro.org, andy@kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 1:13=E2=80=AFAM Kent Gibson <warthog618@gmail.com> =
wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 06:58:14PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 12:14=E2=80=AFPM Kent Gibson <warthog618@gmail.=
com> wrote:
> > >
> > > The documentation for default_values mentions high/low which can be
> > > confusing, particularly when the ACTIVE_LOW flag is set.
> > >
> > > Replace high/low with active/inactive to clarify that the values are
> > > logical not physical.
> > >
> > > Similarly, clarify the interpretation of values in struct gpiohandle_=
data.
> >
> > I'm not against this particular change, but I want the entire GPIO
> > documentation to be aligned in the terminology aspect. Is this the
> > case after this patch? I.o.w. have we replaced all leftovers?
>
> Agreed. Those are the last remnants of the low/high terminolgy that I am
> aware of, certainly the last in gpio.h.
>
> Having a closer look to double check...
>
> Ah - it is still used in Documentation/userspace-api/gpio/sysfs.rst -
> not somewhere I go very often.
> Would you like that updated in a separate patch?

Yes, please. For this one
Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>

--=20
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko