On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 4:59 PM Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > pon., 8 lip 2019 o 12:24 Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> napisał(a): > > On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 11:45 AM Bartosz Golaszewski > > <bgolaszewski@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > pt., 5 lip 2019 o 18:05 Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@xxxxxxxxx> napisał(a): > > > > +static int gpio_virt_agg_set_config(struct gpio_chip *chip, > > > > + unsigned int offset, unsigned long config) > > > > +{ > > > > + struct gpio_virt_agg_priv *priv = gpiochip_get_data(chip); > > > > + > > > > + chip = priv->desc[offset]->gdev->chip; > > > > + if (chip->set_config) > > > > + return chip->set_config(chip, offset, config); > > > > + > > > > + // FIXME gpiod_set_transitory() expects success if not implemented > > > > BTW, do you have a comment about this FIXME? > > Ha! Interesting. I'll give it a thought and respond elsewhere as it's > a different subject. > > > > > + return -ENOTSUPP; Upon closer look, this turns out to be a red herring: gpiod_set_transitory() converts -ENOTSUPP to zero, so there is no issue. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds