Re: [PATCH 00/13] gpiolib: add gpiods_set_array_value_cansleep

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Sat, Feb 1, 2025 at 6:22 PM Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 1, 2025 at 5:17 PM David Lechner <dlechner@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On 2/1/25 10:14 AM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > > On Sat, Feb 1, 2025 at 5:09 PM David Lechner <dlechner@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >> On 2/1/25 4:36 AM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:

...

> > >>> This looks good to me except for one thing: the function prefix. I would
> > >>> really appreciate it if we could stay within the existing gpiod_ namespace and
> > >>> not add a new one in the form of gpiods_.
> > >>>
> > >>> Maybe: gpiod_multiple_set_ or gpiod_collected_set...?
> > >>
> > >> I was waiting for someone to complain about the naming. ;-)
> > >>
> > >> I was going for as short as possible, but OK, the most obvious prefix to me
> > >> would be `gpio_descs_...` (to match the first parameter). Any objections to
> > >> that?
> > >
> > > Yes, objection! As far as any exported interfaces go: in my book
> > > "gpio_" is the prefix for legacy symbols we want to go away and
> > > "gpiod_" is the prefix for current, descriptor-based API. Anything
> > > else is a no-go. I prefer a longer name that starts with gpiod_ over
> > > anything that's shorter but doesn't.
> >
> > Oops, that was a typo. I meant to write gpiod_descs_.
>
> Eh... the D in gpioD already stands for "GPIO Descriptor" but if
> there's no better option in your opinion than I guess I can live with
> that.

gpiod_set_many_value_cansleep() ?

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko