On Sat, 22 Jul 2023 17:15:26 +0200
Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 22, 2023 at 10:47:24AM -0400, Hugo Villeneuve wrote:
> > On Fri, 21 Jul 2023 13:24:19 -0600
> > Rob Herring <robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Jul 21, 2023 at 10:19 AM Hugo Villeneuve <hugo@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > From: Hugo Villeneuve <hvilleneuve@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > > Commit 679875d1d880 ("sc16is7xx: Separate GPIOs from modem control lines")
> > > > and commit 21144bab4f11 ("sc16is7xx: Handle modem status lines")
> > > > changed the function of the GPIOs pins to act as modem control
> > > > lines without any possibility of selecting GPIO function.
> > >
> > > Requiring a new DT property is not fixing a kernel regression. You
> > > should be returning the kernel to original behavior and then have a
> > > new DT property for new behavior.
> >
> > Hi Rob,
> > please read the entire patch history starting from V1
> > and you will understand why this course of action was
> > not selected.
>
> That's not going to happen, sorry, you need to explain it here, in this
> patch series, why a specific action is being taken over another one, as
> no one has time to go dig through past history, sorry.
Hi Rob,
I initially submitted a patch to revert the kernel to original
behavior, but it created more problems because the patch was
unfortunately split in two separate patches, and mixed with other non
closely-related changes. It was also noted to me that reverting to the
old behavior would break things for some users.
It was suggested to me by a more experienced kernel developer to
"suggest a fix, instead of hurrying a revert":
https://lkml.org/lkml/2023/5/17/758
That is what we decided to do in the end, and it worked quite well.
Hugo.
