Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] gpio: regmap: Support few IC specific operations

From: Andy Shevchenko
Date: Fri May 21 2021 - 07:20:15 EST


On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 1:19 PM Michael Walle <michael@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Am 2021-05-21 12:09, schrieb Andy Shevchenko:
> > On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 12:53 PM Matti Vaittinen
> > <matti.vaittinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> Changelog v2: (based on suggestions by Michael Walle)
> >> - drop gpio_regmap_set_drvdata()
> >
> > But why do we have gpio_regmap_get_drvdata() and why is it different
> > now to the new member handling?
>
> Eg. the reg_mask_xlate() callback is just passed a "struct
> gpio_regmap*".
> If someone needs to access private data there, gpio_regmap_get_drvdata()
> is used. At least that was its intention.
>
> Thus I was also suggesting to use "struct gpio_regmap*" in the newer
> callbacks.
>
> I don't get what you mean by "different to the new member handling"?

Currently we have a symmetrical API that is getter and setter against
a certain field.
Now this change drops the setter and introduces some other field somewhere else.
Sounds to me:
- either this has to be split into two changes with explanation of
what's going on
- or something odd is happening here which I do not understand.

--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko