linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] mmc: sdhci-of-arasan: Enable UHS-1 support for Keem Bay SOC

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: <CAHp75VeyO1XErkO=sGnY2VTyPQT9Gp-rkfPdmj0AMM95fA2J1g@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 7 Oct 2020 17:54:48 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     "Zulkifli, Muhammad Husaini" <muhammad.husaini.zulkifli@...el.com>
Cc:     Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>,
        "Hunter, Adrian" <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
        Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
        Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
        linux-mmc <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm Mailing List <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Raja Subramanian, Lakshmi Bai" 
        <lakshmi.bai.raja.subramanian@...el.com>,
        "Wan Mohamad, Wan Ahmad Zainie" 
        <wan.ahmad.zainie.wan.mohamad@...el.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] mmc: sdhci-of-arasan: Enable UHS-1 support for
 Keem Bay SOC

On Wed, Oct 7, 2020 at 4:28 PM Zulkifli, Muhammad Husaini
<muhammad.husaini.zulkifli@...el.com> wrote:
> >From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
> >Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2020 4:56 PM
> >On Wed, Oct 7, 2020 at 11:38 AM Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>
> >wrote:
> >> On 06. 10. 20 17:55, muhammad.husaini.zulkifli@...el.com wrote:

...

> >> > +     struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> >>
> >> nit: I got this but as I see 3 lines below maybe would be better to
> >> use it everywhere but it can be done in separate patch.
> >
> >In that case I think it would be better to have that patch first. It make follow up
> >code cleaner.
> I want to get some clarification here.

> Do I need a separate patch for this struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;?

It should be a separate patch and better your series starts with it,
so it won't interfere with new code.

> Can I embedded together with UHS patch?

Better to avoid merging orthogonal things together in one change.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko