On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 4:44 PM, Markus Pargmann <mpa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > There is no reason to find out chip and hwnum to use to request a gpio > and get another gpio descriptor. We already have the descriptor we want > to use so we can directly use it. > > Signed-off-by: Markus Pargmann <mpa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c | 17 ++++++----------- > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c > index 79a0b41ce57b..872fdd3617c1 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c > +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c > @@ -2189,25 +2189,20 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(__gpiod_get_index_optional); > int gpiod_hog(struct gpio_desc *desc, const char *name, > unsigned long lflags, enum gpiod_flags dflags) > { > - struct gpio_chip *chip; > - struct gpio_desc *local_desc; > - int hwnum; > int status; > > - chip = gpiod_to_chip(desc); > - hwnum = gpio_chip_hwgpio(desc); > - > - local_desc = gpiochip_request_own_desc(chip, hwnum, name); > - if (IS_ERR(local_desc)) { > + status = __gpiod_request(desc, name); > + if (status) { > pr_err("requesting hog GPIO %s (chip %s, offset %d) failed\n", > - name, chip->label, hwnum); > - return PTR_ERR(local_desc); > + name, gpiod_to_chip(desc)->label, > + gpio_chip_hwgpio(desc)); > + return status; > } > > status = gpiod_configure_flags(desc, name, lflags, dflags); > if (status < 0) { > pr_err("setup of hog GPIO %s (chip %s, offset %d) failed\n", > - name, chip->label, hwnum); > + name, gpiod_to_chip(desc)->label, gpio_chip_hwgpio(desc)); > gpiochip_free_own_desc(desc); Mmm I should have reviewed this patch earlier, but what bothers me a bit is that it breaks the symetry that we had by calling request_own_desc() and free_own_desc() in the failing case (as well as in gpiochip_free_hogs). And in the end you still need to call gpiod_to_chip() so I am not sure what the benefit is. Sure, the code is less verbose, but at the same time it has become slightly harder to understand. Semantically speaking "request_own_desc()" is exactly the action we want to convey. __gpiod_request() is more ambiguous. Note that this is not a reject, I just wanted to stress that "less code" is not necessarily the same as "easier to read". -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html