[PATCH v3 2/2] Input: ads7846: use gpio_request_one to configure pendown_gpio

Igor Grinberg grinberg at compulab.co.il
Fri Feb 4 09:47:09 EST 2011



On 02/04/11 16:16, G, Manjunath Kondaiah wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 04, 2011 at 03:08:47PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 04, 2011 at 07:02:50PM +0530, G, Manjunath Kondaiah wrote:
>>> On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 09:19:53AM -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 08:54:05AM -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 08:51:46PM +0530, Sourav Poddar wrote:
>>>>>> The ads7846 driver requests a gpio but does not currently
>>>>>> configure it explicitly as an input. Use gpio_request_one
>>>>>> to request and configure it at one shot.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Sourav Poddar <sourav.poddar at ti.com>
>>>>>> Cc: Dmitry Torokhov <dtor at mail.ru>
>>>>> Will apply this one, the other one is a bit messy IMO, will have to
>>>>> think about it.
>>>>>
>>>> Something like below should do I think.
>>> Patch looks good but it applies only on top of previous patch:
>>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/529941/
>>>
>>> Why to have two patches for this fix?
>> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-omap/msg45167.html
> My point here is: 
> 1. The first patch only replaces gpio_request with gpio_request_one
> 2. Rest of the things are handled in 2nd patch posted by dmitry
>
> What is harm in merging both the patches? I don't think it affects
> readability.

Because the changes introduced by the patches are from different nature.
As stated in the link above, one is a functional change (gpio setup change)
and second is fixing the imbalance in request - free calls.
The impact is not readability, but bad bisect-ability.


-- 
Regards,
Igor.




More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list