linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 6/8] i2c: demux: Use changeset helpers for clarity

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: <2195898.2J8Qfnu3DQ@avalon>
Date:   Thu, 22 Feb 2018 12:19:32 +0200
From:   Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
To:     Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc:     Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart+renesas@...asonboard.com>,
        DRI Development <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@...sulko.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
        Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
        Matt Porter <mporter@...sulko.com>,
        Koen Kooi <koen@...inion.thruhere.net>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        Marek Vasut <marex@...x.de>, Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
        "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" 
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux I2C <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 6/8] i2c: demux: Use changeset helpers for clarity

Hi Geert,

On Thursday, 22 February 2018 11:26:44 EET Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 1:05 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > From: Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@...sulko.com>
> > 
> > The changeset helpers are easier to use, use them instead of
> > using the static property.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@...sulko.com>
> > Acked-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
> > ["okay" -> "ok"]
> 
> Why? ePAPR says "okay", "disabled", "fail", or "fail-sss".
> 
> Sorry for missing this in the previous round.

That was per Wolfram's request, and because the existing code uses "ok". I'm 
personally fine with any.

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart