Hi Tzung-Bi, thanks for your patch!
This is semantically correct, so the comments are not about that. On Fri, Feb 13, 2026 at 10:31 AM Tzung-Bi Shih <[email protected]> wrote: > gpiochip_sysfs_unregister() is only called by gpiochip_remove() where > the struct gpio_chip is ensured. > > Remove the redundant check. > > Signed-off-by: Tzung-Bi Shih <[email protected]> (...) > -void gpiochip_sysfs_unregister(struct gpio_device *gdev) > +void gpiochip_sysfs_unregister(struct gpio_chip *chip) Here it is chip > -static inline void gpiochip_sysfs_unregister(struct gpio_device *gdev) > +static inline void gpiochip_sysfs_unregister(struct gpio_chip *chip) And here. > @@ -1286,7 +1286,7 @@ void gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *gc) > struct gpio_device *gdev = gc->gpiodev; But you can see that we call it "gc" (gpiochip). Chip is more ambiguous I think, can you use "gc" everywhere? Either way, because the patch is so nice: Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <[email protected]> Yours, Linus Walleij

