On Mon, 2017-02-27 at 09:27 +0100, Benjamin Tissoires wrote: > On Feb 20 2017 or thereabouts, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > There are three possibilities in gpiod_count(): ACPI, OF, and > > platform data. > > > > Some of them return 0, which requires to be handled separately, > > though > > developers rather lazy and just shadow an actual error code. > > > > Let's make this API consistent by not allowing 0 in returned value. > > > > There are luckily only 3 users right now, one of them handles this > > properly, the rest is converted in this series. > > > > Series is supposed to go through GPIO tree. > > > > Andy Shevchenko (4): > > gpio: acpi: Don't return 0 on acpi_gpio_count() > > gpio: of: Don't return 0 on dt_gpio_count() > > platform/x86: surface3_button: Propagate error from gpiod_count() > > Input: soc_button_array - Propagate error from gpiod_count() > > Not sure if this still matters, but still: > Acked-by: Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@xxxxxxxxxx> I'm sure it is. Linus, is your plan to go through queue after merge window is closed? -- Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Intel Finland Oy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
