On Wed, 2017-01-11 at 13:21 +0100, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Andy Shevchenko > <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Make fwnode_get_named_gpiod() consistent with the rest of > > gpiod_get() like API, > > i.e. configure GPIO pin immediately after request. > > > > Besides obvious clean up it will help to configure pins based on > > firmware > > provided resources. > > > > Reviewed-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > This is overall fine. However I have another patch in the works from > Alexander Stein to pass down the label to the core properly, can you > look > at this patch too, so we don't have to mess around too much? > http://marc.info/?l=linux-gpio&m=148179211709228&w=2 > > Which patch should we base on which patch? Or can they be > combined into one? > That patch has been held back awaiting ACKs and already > has an ACK from Jacek so I would merge it first. Could you > rebase this patch on top of Alexander's patch? > At the first glance looks okay to just merge it. Means I don't see it might affect functionality of what I'm trying to do. So, please, go ahead and thanks for pointing out. I will prepare mine on top of it. -- Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Intel Finland Oy -- 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