linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 1/4] mfd: da9150: Add support for Fuel-Gauge

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]

Message-ID: <2E89032DDAA8B9408CB92943514A0337AB557CA1@SW-EX-MBX01.diasemi.com>
Date:	Thu, 25 Jun 2015 09:34:05 +0000
From:	"Opensource [Adam Thomson]" <Adam.Thomson.Opensource@...semi.com>
To:	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
	"Opensource [Adam Thomson]" <Adam.Thomson.Opensource@...semi.com>
CC:	Paul Bolle <pebolle@...cali.nl>,
	Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>,
	Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>,
	Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <dbaryshkov@...il.com>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
	"Kumar Gala" <galak@...eaurora.org>,
	"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Support Opensource <Support.Opensource@...semi.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/4] mfd: da9150: Add support for Fuel-Gauge

On June 22, 2015 17:48, Lee Jones wrote:

> > > The pedant in me noticed that this function is actually added in 3/4. So
> > > this chunk might be moved to 3/4, if you like to entertain pedantry like
> > > that, that is. (But see my remark on 3/4 too.)
> >
> > This is true, but as the header is part of MFD, I included it as part of that
> > patch as I thought this made more sense. I guess Lee will comment as to whether
> > that was correct or not. :)
> 
> Glanced over this (as I still have 240 unread emails to attend to).
> If the question is whether to submit the prototype at the same time as
> the associated function, the answer is yes.

Hope you've managed to trawl through the e-mails.

The question was whether or not the function and prototype should be submitted
as part of the same individual patch file. Both are submitted as part of the
patch set but the prototype resides in the MFD patch, and the function in the
power (fuel-gauge) patch. Personally, this seems fine to me but I'm not a
maintainer.