On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 08:28:00AM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> pon., 22 lip 2019 o 18:06 Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> napisał(a):
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 05:02:57PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > > From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > Now that the last user of platform data (sh ecovec24) defines a proper
> > > GPIO lookup and sets the 'default-on' device property, we can drop the
> > > platform_data-specific GPIO handling and unify a big chunk of code.
> > >
> > > The only field used from the platform data is now the fbdev pointer.
> >
> > > -static int gpio_backlight_probe_dt(struct platform_device *pdev,
> > > - struct gpio_backlight *gbl)
> > > -{
> > > - struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> > > - enum gpiod_flags flags;
> > > - int ret;
> > > -
> > > - gbl->def_value = device_property_read_bool(dev, "default-on");
> > > - flags = gbl->def_value ? GPIOD_OUT_HIGH : GPIOD_OUT_LOW;
> > > -
> > > - gbl->gpiod = devm_gpiod_get(dev, NULL, flags);
> > > - if (IS_ERR(gbl->gpiod)) {
> > > - ret = PTR_ERR(gbl->gpiod);
> > > -
> > > - if (ret != -EPROBE_DEFER) {
> > > - dev_err(dev,
> > > - "Error: The gpios parameter is missing or invalid.\n");
> > > - }
> > > - return ret;
> > > - }
> > > -
> > > - return 0;
> > > -}
> >
> > Why not leave this function (perhaps with different name)?
>
> Why would we do that if the entire probe() function is now less than
> 50 lines long? Also: it gets inlined by the compiler anyway. It
> doesn't make sense IMO.
I'm not against this, perhaps, dropping and moving can be split to two changes.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
