On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 10:48 AM, Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 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? Yes sorry for the delay, it was a busy merge window etc. I'd like to have some nod from Mika/Rafael that this is what we want to do. If I don't hear anything I guess I will just merge them, it looks right to me. Yours, Linus Walleij -- 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
