Re: [PATCH 02/62] gpio: gpio-104-dio-48e: Use new GPIO_LINE_DIRECTION

["Vaittinen, Matti" <Matti.Vaittinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 2019-11-05 at 16:23 +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 11:10 AM Matti Vaittinen
> <matti.vaittinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > It's hard for occasional GPIO code reader/writer to know if values
> > 0/1
> > equal to IN or OUT. Use defined GPIO_LINE_DIRECTION_IN and
> > GPIO_LINE_DIRECTION_OUT to help them out.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Matti Vaittinen <matti.vaittinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Please merge all of these patches 2-n into one to avoid patch bombs
> and just make one technical step.
> 
> Oh the patch bomb already dropped, hehe. 

I was slightly impatient ^_^;

I did split the patch set into this many patches so that driver
maintainers would only need to check their own driver (just few lines).
I also thought that if some driver maintainers have objections then it
is easy to drop out such patch. The "patch bomb" 

(which you referred in the other mail 
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CACRpkdav+Sz04WE6N5KkKMQLOtx2BZrjWrEin06yPZQ31a47hg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
)

was really only such bomb for you and Bartosz (+GPIO/LKML mail lists) -
I did not CC all patches to everyone - driver maintainers only got the
patch adding the define(s) and a patch for their respective driver(s)
:) Unfortunately I messed up the message IDs from mail headers so the
mails for the series were not properly threaded :/

> Anyways I want one
> big patch to apply. Please make sure it applies on the GPIO tree's
> "devel" branch.

Right. I guess I can do that.

> Collect any ACKs and drop most from the CC else the driver
> maintainers may get annoyed.

My problem is that I don't know who are the driver maintainers I should
keep and who I should drop. I don't usually know who are interested in 
which changes.


> 
> Yours,
> Linus Walleij