Re: [PATCH] gpiolib: unexport gpiod_set_transitory()

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Mon, Sep 04, 2023 at 01:14:29PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 4, 2023 at 12:19 PM Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 03, 2023 at 09:06:57PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > > From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > There are no and never have been any users of gpiod_set_transitory()
> > > outside the core GPIOLIB code. Make it private.
> >
> > And rename to be gpio_desc_...()?
> >
> > With this done,
> > Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > The rationale has been explained in the other threads with renaming matters.
> 
> I'm not buying this explanation. Public GPIO functions don't have a
> monopoly on the gpiod_ prefix. Eventually I'd love to unify the naming
> convention for the three important structures that we use:
> gpio_device, gpio_chip and gpio_desc, no matter whether they're public
> or private as that's already clear from their placement in
> include/linux/ or drivers/gpio/.

And I would like to avoid adding confusion by mixing internal and external APIs
under the same prefix.

Personally I do not like this change, when gpiod_ is being used. So, you may
override this, you are the maintainer, but then here is the formal NAK from me
(as a user of these APIs internally and externally).

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko