On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 12:11 PM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Ugh, taking one last look at the "pinctrl: Export pinctrl_unregister_mappings" > patch it is no good, sorry. Ooops! > Linus, can you please drop this from your -next ? Sure, done. > So I see 2 options: > 1) Add an orig_map member to maps_node and use that in the comparison, > this is IMHO somewhat ugly > > 2) Add a new pinctrl_register_mappings_no_dup helper and document in > pinctrl_unregister_mappings kdoc that it can only be used together > with the no_dup variant. > > I believe that 2 is by far the best option. Linus do you agree or > do you have any other suggestions? What about (3) look for all calls to pinctrl_register_mappings() in the kernel. Hey it is 2 places in total: arch/arm/mach-u300/core.c: pinctrl_register_mappings(u300_pinmux_map, drivers/pinctrl/cirrus/pinctrl-madera-core.c: ret = pinctrl_register_mappings(pdata->gpio_configs, Delete __initdata from the u300 table, the other one seems safe. Fold this into your patch. Go with the original idea. Yours, Linus Walleij _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
