Hi Bart, On 9/28/23 20:40, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > On Thu, 28 Sept 2023 at 14:40, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Hi All, >> >> Here is a v2 of Bartosz' "don't use gpiod_toggle_active_low()" series. >> >> New in v2: >> - Rework to deal with ACPI path vs gpiod_lookup.key differences: >> acpi_get_handle(path) -> acpi_fetch_acpi_dev(handle) -> acpi_dev_name(adev) >> >> Regards, >> >> Hans >> >> >> Bartosz Golaszewski (2): >> platform/x86: int3472: Add new >> skl_int3472_gpiod_get_from_temp_lookup() helper >> gpio: acpi: remove acpi_get_and_request_gpiod() >> >> Hans de Goede (3): >> platform/x86: int3472: Add new skl_int3472_fill_gpiod_lookup() helper >> platform/x86: int3472: Stop using gpiod_toggle_active_low() >> platform/x86: int3472: Switch to devm_get_gpiod() >> >> drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c | 28 ----- >> .../x86/intel/int3472/clk_and_regulator.c | 54 ++-------- >> drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/common.h | 7 +- >> drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/discrete.c | 101 ++++++++++++++---- >> drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/led.c | 24 +---- >> include/linux/gpio/consumer.h | 8 -- >> 6 files changed, 93 insertions(+), 129 deletions(-) >> >> -- >> 2.41.0 >> > > Thanks Hans, this looks good to me. I'd let it sit on the list for a > week. After that, do you want to take patches 1-4 and provide me with > another tag? I have just send out a v3 to address Andy's remark about me somehow resetting the authorship to me on 2 patches from Bartosz. While working on this I noticed (and fixed) a bug in: [RFT PATCH 1/4] platform/x86: int3472: provide a helper for getting GPIOs from lookups https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230926145943.42814-2-brgl@xxxxxxxx/ struct gpiod_lookup_table *lookup __free(kfree) = kzalloc(struct_size(lookup, table, 1), GFP_KERNEL); You are allocating an entry for the temp lookup, but the gpiolib core expects lookup tables to be terminated with an entry lookup, so this should alloc space for 2 entries: struct gpiod_lookup_table *lookup __free(kfree) = kzalloc(struct_size(lookup, table, 2), GFP_KERNEL); Despite this already being fixed now I wanted to explicitly point this out in case you have used the same construct elsewhere during your recent gpiolib cleanup efforts ? As for your request for a tag for the 4st 4 patches for you to merge into gpiolib. I'll go and work work on that. I need to coordinate this with Ilpo, with whom I now co-maintain pdx86 . Regards, Hans
