Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-181223-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
Date: Thu, 16 May 2024 23:19:58 +0800
From: Kent Gibson <warthog618@gmail.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@oracle.com>,
	Hu Haowen <2023002089@link.tyut.edu.cn>, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
	Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>, Alex Shi <alexs@kernel.org>,
	Yanteng Si <siyanteng@loongson.cn>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] gpio: Remove legacy API documentation
Message-ID: <20240516151958.GA146240@rigel>
References: <20240508101703.830066-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
 <ZkYQHnF76WLIf8-r@smile.fi.intel.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ZkYQHnF76WLIf8-r@smile.fi.intel.com>

On Thu, May 16, 2024 at 04:54:38PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Wed, May 08, 2024 at 01:17:01PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > In order to discourage people to use old and legacy GPIO APIs
> > remove the respective documentation completely. It also helps
> > further cleanups of the legacy GPIO API leftovers, which is
> > ongoing task.
>
> Bart, Linus, Kent, what do you think about this?
>

I don't know enough about the situation to provide much of an opinion.
I can say that generally speaking I'm not a fan of removing documentation
for an API until the API itself has been completely removed.

And from my experience users will just Google and find the docs from an
old kernel anyway.  That point could be used to argue both for and
against - if they can find it anyway there is no harm in removing it.
But probably not much benefit either.

Sorry - that probably doesn't help much.
FWIW you can count me as indifferent.

Cheers,
Kent.