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

Reply via email to