Re: [PATCH v2 01/13] gpiolib: add gpiod_multi_set_value_cansleep()
From: David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com>
Date: 2025-02-07 16:29:15
Also in:
linux-gpio, linux-iio, linux-mmc, linux-sound, lkml, netdev
On 2/7/25 3:10 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
Hi David, On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 at 23:48, David Lechner [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
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 <redacted> Signed-off-by: David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com>Thanks for your patch!quoted
--- 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?quoted
+} + #endifGr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert
-- linux-phy mailing list linux-phy@lists.infradead.org https://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-phy