On Tue, 31 Jan 2017 00:44:47 -0800
Dmitry Torokhov [off-list ref] wrote:

On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 09:04:32AM +0100, Boris Brezillon wrote:

quoted

On Mon, 30 Jan 2017 17:06:07 -0800
Dmitry Torokhov [off-list ref] wrote:
  

quoted

On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 04:41:48PM +0100, Boris Brezillon wrote:  

quoted

Rename devm_get_gpiod_from_child() into
devm_fwnode_get_gpiod_from_child() to reflect the fact that this
function is operating on a fwnode object.    

I believe this is completely pointless rename. Are you planning on
adding devm_of_get_gpiod_from_child()? Or
devm_acpt_get_gpiod_from_child()? (I sure hope not).  

Of course not.
  

quoted

Also, on what object? Does it take fwnode as first argument? Or maybe we
should call it devm_dev_const_charp_fwnode_get_gpiod_from_child() so we
know types of all arguments?  

Linus suggested to rename this function [1]. I personally don't care
much about the name, though I agree with Linus that names should be
consistent and descriptive. Moreover, he's the maintainer, and I tend
to follow maintainers suggestion when I contribute to a specific
subsystem.  

OK, I did not know that that was Linus' request, my objection still
stands.

quoted

IIUC, you're concerned about the length of this function name. If I had
to drop something it would be the _from_child() suffix, because the
function is not even checking that the child parameter is actually a
direct child (or a descendant) of device->fwnode.  

OK, that sounds better. Actually, we already have
fwnode_get_named_gpiod(), unfortunately it does not do suffixes
permutations. There are also no users, except
devm_get_gpiod_from_child(). So I would:

- rename fwnode_get_named_gpiod() -> static __fwnode_get_named_gpiod()
- made new fwnode_get_named_gpiod() that did suffix permutation and
  called __fwnode_get_named_gpiod() (or pulled its implementation
  inline)

Sorry but I don't follow you. Why do you need
__fwnode_get_named_gpiod(), and what is the suffix permutation you're
mentioning here?

- renamed devm_get_gpiod_from_child() ->
  devm_fwnode_get_named_gpiod(dev, fwnode, con_id)
  and called fwnode_get_named_gpiod().

Okay. I'm fine with this name, let's see what Linus says.

This would indeed match the pattern with other fwnode/property handling
APIs.

Thanks.