On Thu, Oct 20, 2022 at 3:48 AM Xiang Yang <xiangyang3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Using the METHOD_NAME__AEI macro instead of using "_AEI" directly. > > Signed-off-by: Xiang Yang <xiangyang3@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c > index a7d2358736fe..064ba5150fd4 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c > +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c > @@ -512,7 +512,7 @@ void acpi_gpiochip_request_interrupts(struct gpio_chip *chip) > if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) > return; > > - acpi_walk_resources(handle, "_AEI", > + acpi_walk_resources(handle, METHOD_NAME__AEI, > acpi_gpiochip_alloc_event, acpi_gpio); This line dates back to 2018 so why -next in your PATCH tag? That being said - patch applied (unless Andy wants to take it directly). Bart > > mutex_lock(&acpi_gpio_deferred_req_irqs_lock); > -- > 2.22.0 >
