On Sat, Feb 1, 2025 at 12:36 PM Bartosz Golaszewski [off-list ref] wrote:

On Fri, 31 Jan 2025 21:24:40 +0100, David Lechner [off-list ref] said:

quoted

This series was inspired by some minor annoyance I have experienced a
few times in recent reviews.

Calling gpiod_set_array_value_cansleep() can be quite verbose due to
having so many parameters. In most cases, we already have a struct
gpio_descs that contains the first 3 parameters so we end up with 3 (or
often even 6) pointer indirections at each call site. Also, people have
a tendency to want to hard-code the first argument instead of using
struct gpio_descs.ndescs, often without checking that ndescs >= the
hard-coded value.

So I'm proposing that we add a gpiods_set_array_value_cansleep()
function that is a wrapper around gpiod_set_array_value_cansleep()
that has struct gpio_descs as the first parameter to make it a bit
easier to read the code and avoid the hard-coding temptation.

I've just done gpiods_set_array_value_cansleep() for now since there
were over 10 callers of this one. There aren't as many callers of
the get and atomic variants, but we can add those too if this seems
like a useful thing to do.

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...?

+1 here, i.e. I like the idea, but the naming needs to be amended.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko