Re: [PATCH 1/2] [PATCH] gpio: Replace usage of bare 'unsigned' with 'unsigned int'

From: Linus Walleij
Date: Mon Aug 05 2019 - 05:26:17 EST

On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 6:52 AM Hennie Muller <hm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 10:05:00AM +0800, Phil Reid wrote:

> > I've encountered these checkpatch warnings as well.
> >
> > However 'struct gpio_chip' callbacks define the function signatures
> > as 'unsigned', not 'unsigned int'. So I've also left them as is, to explicitly
> > match the struct definition.
> >
> > Be interested to know what the official take on this is.
> In hindsight, I saw most of the other gpio drivers follow the same
> convention as the viperboard driver. which means
> a) my changes add no value and just creates inconsistency.
> or
> b) there's an opportunity to fix up the rest of the gpio drivers as
> well? Which I'll be happy to do.

I think it is fine to fix this in drivers and we can fix the prototypes
as well.

Linus Walleij