[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <fb5d11cd-6729-5521-c828-9bfeedba9ce0@linaro.org>
Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2018 18:47:22 +0200
From: Georgi Djakov <georgi.djakov@...aro.org>
To: Quentin Perret <quentin.perret@....com>
Cc: gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
rjw@...ysocki.net, robh+dt@...nel.org, mturquette@...libre.com,
khilman@...libre.com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
skannan@...eaurora.org, bjorn.andersson@...aro.org,
amit.kucheria@...aro.org, seansw@....qualcomm.com,
daidavid1@...eaurora.org, evgreen@...omium.org,
dianders@...omium.org, mark.rutland@....com,
lorenzo.pieralisi@....com, abailon@...libre.com,
maxime.ripard@...tlin.com, arnd@...db.de, thierry.reding@...il.com,
ksitaraman@...dia.com, sanjayc@...dia.com,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 8/8] interconnect: sdm845: Fix build failure after
cmd_db API change
Hi Quentin,
On 12/7/18 18:27, Quentin Perret wrote:
> Hi Georgi,
>
> On Friday 07 Dec 2018 at 17:29:17 (+0200), Georgi Djakov wrote:
>> Recently the cmd_db_read_aux_data() function was changed to avoid using
>> memcpy and return a pointer instead. Update the code to the new API and
>> fix the build failure.
>>
>> Fixes: ed3cafa79ea7 ("soc: qcom: cmd-db: Stop memcpy()ing in cmd_db_read_aux_data()")
>> Signed-off-by: Georgi Djakov <georgi.djakov@...aro.org>
>> ---
>> drivers/interconnect/qcom/sdm845.c | 26 ++++++++++++++------------
>
> IIUC this file is introduced by patch 5. Should the fix be squashed
> into patch 5 directly ? Just to keep things bisectable.
The reason why i have split it as a separate change is because as a
separate change it would be easier to review & test for the people who
are already familiar with the rest of the series.
Another minor reason is that a separate patch will also make the life a
bit easier for some people who are back-porting this to kernels using
the older version of the cmd_db API.
The commit that changed the cmd_db API is not yet in mainline, but in
linux-next. I am not sure what is preferred in this case?
Thanks,
Georgi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists