Re: [linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH 04/14] pinctrl: sunxi: v3: really introduce support for V3
From: Paul Kocialkowski
Date: Mon Mar 18 2019 - 07:05:20 EST
Hi,
Le mardi 12 mars 2019 Ã 23:45 +0800, Icenowy Zheng a Ãcrit :
>
> ä 2019å3æ12æ GMT+08:00 äå11:36:54, Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@xxxxxxxxxxx> åå:
> > On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 11:22:46PM +0800, Icenowy Zheng wrote:
> > > Introduce the GPIO pins that is only available on V3 (not on V3s) to
> > the
> > > V3 pinctrl driver.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Icenowy Zheng <icenowy@xxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/pinctrl-sun8i-v3.c | 291
> > +++++++++++++++++++++--
> > > drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/pinctrl-sunxi.h | 2 +
> > > 2 files changed, 275 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/pinctrl-sun8i-v3.c
> > b/drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/pinctrl-sun8i-v3.c
> > > index 6704ce8e5e3d..54c210871a95 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/pinctrl-sun8i-v3.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/pinctrl-sun8i-v3.c
> > > @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
> > > /*
> > > - * Allwinner V3s SoCs pinctrl driver.
> > > + * Allwinner V3/V3s SoCs pinctrl driver.
> > > *
> > > * Copyright (C) 2016 Icenowy Zheng <icenowy@xxxxxxxx>
> > > *
> > > @@ -23,7 +23,7 @@
> > >
> > > #include "pinctrl-sunxi.h"
> > >
> > > -static const struct sunxi_desc_pin sun8i_v3s_pins[] = {
> > > +static const struct sunxi_desc_pin sun8i_v3_v3s_pins[] = {
> >
> > I'm not sure all that remaining is worth it to be honest. It adds a
> > lot of noise for no particular reason (and the same goes for renaming
> > the file itself)
>
> Maybe keeping names is okay "for historial reasons".
>
> In fact I want to keep them.
My two cents about this: kernel development is plagued by the unability
to rename and rework things as soon as backward compatibility is
involved. I believe that renaming and reworking things is quite a good
thing to do when it leads to a situation that is easier to understand
and makes more sense.
In this case, I don't see any blockers that would prevent us from doing
this, so I am strongly in favor of it. I really don't see how increased
noise and "historical reasons" make up for better clarity.
Cheers,
Paul
> > Maxime
>
> --
> äç K-9 Mail åéèæçAndroidèåã
>
--
Paul Kocialkowski, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com