Re: [RFC PATCH 0/5] add gpio_chip_ops to hold GPIO operations

[Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hello Linus,

On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 8:20 PM, Javier Martinez Canillas
> <javier.martinez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> So this is an RFC patch-set to add a virtual table to be used by
>> GPIO chip controllers and consist of the following patches:
>
> Overall I like this.
>
> However I don't want to see any transitional phase. I prefer a BIG
> fat patch converting everyone and its dog to the new vtable and
> removing the old function pointers. This can be based on the HEAD
> of my GPIO devel branch.
>

Ok, I was adding a commit per GPIO driver but the patch-set would have
been very big (~200 patches).

> It may be a good idea to use coccinelle for this refactoring in order
> not to miss any users.
>

Agreed, I was manually searching for users by using grep but I agree
that is much safer to use coccinelle for this. I don't have previous
experience writing coccinelle semantics patches though so it may take
more time than I thought but it is the perfect excuse to finally learn
how to do it :-)

Thanks a lot and best regards,
Javier

> Yours,
> Linus Walleij
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-gpio" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-gpio" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html