Re: [PATCH v1] pinctrl: qcom: lpass-lpi: drop unused runtime-PM write helper

[Ajay Kumar Nandam <ajay.nandam@oss.qualcomm.com>]

On 6/10/2026 2:30 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 10/06/2026 10:57, Ajay Kumar Nandam wrote:
>>> So why do we need __lpi_gpio_write()?
>>
>> Hi Krzysztof,
>>
>> Thanks, good point.
>>
>> I will respin with:
>> Reported-by: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
> 
> 
> And checkpatch.
> 
>>
>> About __lpi_gpio_write(): it is still needed for the in-callers path
>> where runtime PM is already held and we only need the raw MMIO helper.
>> The unused wrapper is lpi_gpio_write(), so this fix removes only that
>> dead function.
> 
> No. Why did you have to add __ prefix? Why do we need function named
> with such style?

Hi Krzysztof,

The __ prefix was introduced during refactoring to distinguish the raw 
MMIO helper from lpi_gpio_write(). After the wrapper became unused and 
was removed, the naming is less clear.

Do you recommend renaming these helpers to regular/raw names (without 
__) while keeping behavior unchanged?

Thanks,
Ajay


> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof