On Fri, Feb 3, 2023 at 6:59 PM Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Some drivers are declaring a thermal zone without any thermal trip > points. > > On the other side, we are introducing the function > thermal_zone_device_register_with_trips() which provides an array of > generic thermal trip points. When all the drivers will be converted to > the generic trip points, keeping two functions will be useless. > > Most of the drivers are now using > thermal_zone_device_register_with_trips() with the generic trip > points. As soon as the remaining drivers are merged, the > thermal_zone_device_register_with_trips() will be renamed to > thermal_zone_device_register(). So why is this the first time I'm learning about this plan? > Obviously this renaming can only happen if there are no more user of > the thermal_zone_device_register() function. > > This change uses thermal_zone_device_register_with_trips() with a NULL > parameter for the trip point array instead of > thermal_zone_device_register(). And later it will be renamed to thermal_zone_device_register() again? Can we just stop confusing people this way? What would be wrong with changing both thermal_zone_device_register_with_trips() and thermal_zone_device_register() together when we are ready? And why can't the both be replaced with something line thermal_zone_register() doing all of the necessary things in one go? Why do we have to make confusing and redundant changes?
