linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 10/10] core: platform: use fwnode_driver_match

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 13 Jul 2015 08:55:39 +0200
From:	Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@...labora.com>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
Cc:	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 10/10] core: platform: use fwnode_driver_match_device()

On 11 July 2015 at 04:47, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net> wrote:
> On Friday, July 10, 2015 02:53:53 PM Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
>> On 2 July 2015 at 01:46, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net> wrote:
>> > On Tuesday, June 30, 2015 04:55:08 PM Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
>> >> Instead of calling both of_driver_match_device() and
>> >> acpi_driver_match_device(), call fwnode_driver_match_device() which
>> >> should be able to sort out what firmware describes the device in
>> >> question.
>> >>
>> >> Signed-off-by: Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@...labora.com>
>> >
>> > This one should be part of the other set IMO.
>>
>> Yeah, I wasn't sure about it myself, but in any case the other series
>> won't depend on this patch any more because I have moved the match
>> delay into platform.c. I plan though to resend this with Rob's
>> comments addressed in the next revision, so they can be taken if they
>> are seen worthy in themselves.
>>
>> > Or please just combine the two sets so it is more clear what the new helpers
>> > are intended for.
>>
>> Sorry about that, I did the split because Mark suggested so in the
>> previous review round. I understand that depending on each person's
>> workflow it may be more convenient in one way or the other, so I'm not
>> sure I can find a way that fits everybody's preferences.
>
> The ordering/form in which it is merged need not reflect the ordering/form
> in which it is reviewed and it is much easier to follow changes having full
> context available.

Sure, nobody was talking yet about how this could be merged.

> So you can split it later if need be, but for now let's keep them all together
> for the completeness of the context.

That's fine with me, really. I've been trying to find a way to send
such big series that will work for most people, but that's probably
the hardest part of it all.

Regards,

Tomeu

> Thanks,
> Rafael
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/