"Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@xxxxxxxx> writes: > On Thu, Feb 1, 2024, at 15:18, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote: >> "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@xxxxxxxx> writes: >> >>> We could probably go a little further in the cleanup and >>> throw out the gpiolib path entirely, instead relying >>> on the existing leds-gpio driver. Since there are currently >>> no upstream users of the gpiolib path, that would likely >>> lead to cleaner code but require more changes to any >>> out-of-tree users that rely on the platform_data to >>> pass the GPIOs today. >> >> There being exactly one such out of tree user (per your up-thread >> email) in OpenWrt? Or are you aware of others? > > Actually, on a closer look not even that: the ath9k LED support > in openwrt is quite different from upstream, and it just uses > gpio-led there, with a gpio provider in the driver for the > internal gpios. > > We can probably just remove the gpiolib consumer side from > ath9k entirely then: it's not needed for the PCI devices > at all, and the SoC devices no longer use it upstream or > in openwrt. Alright cool, in that case I am OK with just ripping it out entirely :) -Toke
