[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHp75VdBm8ZYOMWmQEA8LD6uGcJ0sZ=M6n3MSYxmO6UkXbu+-A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2020 16:11:35 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com>
Cc: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
Basil Eljuse <Basil.Eljuse@....com>,
lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org,
Linux-Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
Ferry Toth <fntoth@...il.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] driver core: Replace open-coded list_last_entry()
On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 3:49 PM Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@....com> wrote:
> On 2020-03-30 11:13 am, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 07:40:25PM +0000, Robin Murphy wrote:
...
> AFAICS the difference is down to whether deferred_probe_timeout has
> expired or not - I'm not familiar enough with this code to know
> *exactly* what the difference is supposed to represent, nor which change
> has actually pushed the Juno case from one state to the other (other
> than it almost certainly can't be $SUBJECT - if this series is to blame
> at all I'd assume it would be down to patch #1/3, but there's a bunch of
> other rework previously queued in -next that is probably also interacting)
JFYI: patch #1/3 wasn't applied.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists