Re: [PATCH v2 01/13] gpiolib: add gpiod_multi_set_value_cansleep()
From: David Lechner
Date: Fri Feb 07 2025 - 11:30:39 EST
On 2/7/25 3:10 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 at 23:48, David Lechner <dlechner@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Add a new gpiod_multi_set_value_cansleep() helper function with fewer
>> parameters than gpiod_set_array_value_cansleep().
>>
>> Calling gpiod_set_array_value_cansleep() can get quite verbose. In many
>> cases, the first arguments all come from the same struct gpio_descs, so
>> having a separate function where we can just pass that cuts down on the
>> boilerplate.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> Signed-off-by: David Lechner <dlechner@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Thanks for your patch!
>
>> --- a/include/linux/gpio/consumer.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/gpio/consumer.h
>> @@ -655,4 +655,11 @@ static inline void gpiod_unexport(struct gpio_desc *desc)
>>
>> #endif /* CONFIG_GPIOLIB && CONFIG_GPIO_SYSFS */
>>
>> +static inline int gpiod_multi_set_value_cansleep(struct gpio_descs *descs,
>> + unsigned long *value_bitmap)
>> +{
>> + return gpiod_set_array_value_cansleep(descs->ndescs, descs->desc,
>> + descs->info, value_bitmap);
>
> I am wondering whether this needs a check for !IS_ERR_OR_NULL(descs),
> to handle the !CONFIG_GPIOLIB and gpiod_get_array_optional() cases?
I don't think it is strictly needed, but could be convenient for future use
cases. If we add it, should it be:
if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(descs))
return PTR_ERR(descs);
or:
if (!descs)
return -EINVAL;
if (IS_ERR(descs))
return PTR_ERR(descs);
?
For comparison, gpiod_set_array_value_cansleep() will return -EINVAL if the
first argument is NULL.
>
> Slightly related: shouldn't gpiod_put_array() (both the implementation
> and the !CONFIG_GPIOLIB dummy) allow the caller to pass NULL, to
> streamline the gpiod_get_array_optional() case?
>
>> +}
>> +
>> #endif
>
> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
>
> Geert
>