Re: [PATCH 1/3] pinctrl: core: create unlocked version of pinctrl_find_gpio_range_from_pin

[Joachim Eastwood <manabian@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 25 February 2016 at 15:55, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 12:19 PM, Joachim  Eastwood <manabian@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>> Or rather, pinctrl_fund_gpio_range_from_pin_locked(),
>>> indicating that you're already holding the necessary lock
>>> when calling the function. Now I'm even confusing myself,
>>> sorry :(
>>
>> Shouldn't the function name indicate what the function does with the lock?
>>
>> pinctrl_fund_gpio_range_from_pin_unlocked() would indicate to me that
>> it does not acquire a lock and it is your responsibility as a caller
>> to ensure that the correct lock is held before calling.
>
> OK hm maybe you're right, grep the kernel for precedents.

hmm, I not sure anymore.

What do you think about pinctrl_find_gpio_range_from_pin_nolock()?

The _nolock() prefix is also used in the kernel and might convey what
we want better. Thoughts?


regards,
Joachim Eastwood
--
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