The C standard allows 'unsigned' as a shorthand for 'unsigned int'.
For improved code clarity and consistency with the prevailing kernel coding
style, replace the shorthand with the more explicit 'unsigned int' type
for function parameters.

This is a purely stylistic cleanup and has no functional impact on the
generated code.

Signed-off-by: Darshan Rathod <darshanrathod475@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/spi/spi-gpio.c | 16 ++++++++--------
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-gpio.c b/drivers/spi/spi-gpio.c
index ea5f1b10b79e..c8dadb532c40 100644
--- a/drivers/spi/spi-gpio.c
+++ b/drivers/spi/spi-gpio.c
@@ -104,7 +104,7 @@ static inline int getmiso(const struct spi_device *spi)
  */
 
 static u32 spi_gpio_txrx_word_mode0(struct spi_device *spi,
-		unsigned nsecs, u32 word, u8 bits, unsigned flags)
+		unsigned int nsecs, u32 word, u8 bits, unsigned int flags)
 {
 	if (unlikely(spi->mode & SPI_LSB_FIRST))
 		return bitbang_txrx_le_cpha0(spi, nsecs, 0, flags, word, bits);
@@ -113,7 +113,7 @@ static u32 spi_gpio_txrx_word_mode0(struct spi_device *spi,
 }
 
 static u32 spi_gpio_txrx_word_mode1(struct spi_device *spi,
-		unsigned nsecs, u32 word, u8 bits, unsigned flags)
+		unsigned int nsecs, u32 word, u8 bits, unsigned int flags)
 {
 	if (unlikely(spi->mode & SPI_LSB_FIRST))
 		return bitbang_txrx_le_cpha1(spi, nsecs, 0, flags, word, bits);
@@ -122,7 +122,7 @@ static u32 spi_gpio_txrx_word_mode1(struct spi_device *spi,
 }
 
 static u32 spi_gpio_txrx_word_mode2(struct spi_device *spi,
-		unsigned nsecs, u32 word, u8 bits, unsigned flags)
+		unsigned int nsecs, u32 word, u8 bits, unsigned int flags)
 {
 	if (unlikely(spi->mode & SPI_LSB_FIRST))
 		return bitbang_txrx_le_cpha0(spi, nsecs, 1, flags, word, bits);
@@ -131,7 +131,7 @@ static u32 spi_gpio_txrx_word_mode2(struct spi_device *spi,
 }
 
 static u32 spi_gpio_txrx_word_mode3(struct spi_device *spi,
-		unsigned nsecs, u32 word, u8 bits, unsigned flags)
+		unsigned int nsecs, u32 word, u8 bits, unsigned int flags)
 {
 	if (unlikely(spi->mode & SPI_LSB_FIRST))
 		return bitbang_txrx_le_cpha1(spi, nsecs, 1, flags, word, bits);
@@ -150,7 +150,7 @@ static u32 spi_gpio_txrx_word_mode3(struct spi_device *spi,
  */
 
 static u32 spi_gpio_spec_txrx_word_mode0(struct spi_device *spi,
-		unsigned nsecs, u32 word, u8 bits, unsigned flags)
+		unsigned int nsecs, u32 word, u8 bits, unsigned int flags)
 {
 	flags = spi->controller->flags;
 	if (unlikely(spi->mode & SPI_LSB_FIRST))
@@ -160,7 +160,7 @@ static u32 spi_gpio_spec_txrx_word_mode0(struct spi_device *spi,
 }
 
 static u32 spi_gpio_spec_txrx_word_mode1(struct spi_device *spi,
-		unsigned nsecs, u32 word, u8 bits, unsigned flags)
+		unsigned int nsecs, u32 word, u8 bits, unsigned int flags)
 {
 	flags = spi->controller->flags;
 	if (unlikely(spi->mode & SPI_LSB_FIRST))
@@ -170,7 +170,7 @@ static u32 spi_gpio_spec_txrx_word_mode1(struct spi_device *spi,
 }
 
 static u32 spi_gpio_spec_txrx_word_mode2(struct spi_device *spi,
-		unsigned nsecs, u32 word, u8 bits, unsigned flags)
+		unsigned int nsecs, u32 word, u8 bits, unsigned int flags)
 {
 	flags = spi->controller->flags;
 	if (unlikely(spi->mode & SPI_LSB_FIRST))
@@ -180,7 +180,7 @@ static u32 spi_gpio_spec_txrx_word_mode2(struct spi_device *spi,
 }
 
 static u32 spi_gpio_spec_txrx_word_mode3(struct spi_device *spi,
-		unsigned nsecs, u32 word, u8 bits, unsigned flags)
+		unsigned int nsecs, u32 word, u8 bits, unsigned int flags)
 {
 	flags = spi->controller->flags;
 	if (unlikely(spi->mode & SPI_LSB_FIRST))
-- 
2.43.0

On Wed, 16 Jul 2025 09:59:05 +0000, Darshan Rathod wrote:
> The C standard allows 'unsigned' as a shorthand for 'unsigned int'.
> For improved code clarity and consistency with the prevailing kernel coding
> style, replace the shorthand with the more explicit 'unsigned int' type
> for function parameters.
> 
> This is a purely stylistic cleanup and has no functional impact on the
> generated code.
> 
> [...]

Applied to

   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/spi.git for-next

Thanks!

[1/1] spi: gpio: Use explicit 'unsigned int' for parameter types
      commit: d929cc75e9791def049a90998aaab8934196131c

All being well this means that it will be integrated into the linux-next
tree (usually sometime in the next 24 hours) and sent to Linus during
the next merge window (or sooner if it is a bug fix), however if
problems are discovered then the patch may be dropped or reverted.

You may get further e-mails resulting from automated or manual testing
and review of the tree, please engage with people reporting problems and
send followup patches addressing any issues that are reported if needed.

If any updates are required or you are submitting further changes they
should be sent as incremental updates against current git, existing
patches will not be replaced.

Please add any relevant lists and maintainers to the CCs when replying
to this mail.

Thanks,
Mark