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

+}
+
 #endif

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert