The comment introduced with the recently added pinctrl_gpio_range.pins element was wrong. This corrects it. Thanks to Patrice Chotard for pointing this out. Signed-off-by: Christian Ruppert <christian.ruppert@xxxxxxxxxx> --- include/linux/pinctrl/pinctrl.h | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/include/linux/pinctrl/pinctrl.h b/include/linux/pinctrl/pinctrl.h index 286c5e5..47ab2fb 100644 --- a/include/linux/pinctrl/pinctrl.h +++ b/include/linux/pinctrl/pinctrl.h @@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ struct pinctrl_pin_desc { * @name: a name for the chip in this range * @id: an ID number for the chip in this range * @base: base offset of the GPIO range - * @pin_base: base pin number of the GPIO range if pins != NULL + * @pin_base: base pin number of the GPIO range if pins == NULL * @pins: enumeration of pins in GPIO range or NULL * @npins: number of pins in the GPIO range, including the base number * @gc: an optional pointer to a gpio_chip -- 1.7.1 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html