linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RESEND] gpiolib: make gpiochip_find_by

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 20 Sep 2022 15:12:32 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
Cc:     Jianqun Xu <jay.xu@...k-chips.com>, linus.walleij@...aro.org,
        linux-gpio@...r.kernel.or, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND] gpiolib: make gpiochip_find_by_name to be common
 function

On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 08:39:59AM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 3:17 AM Jianqun Xu <jay.xu@...k-chips.com> wrote:
> >
> > Move find_chip_by_name from gpiolib to the gpio/driver.h, also rename to
> > gpiochip_find_by_name, make it to be a common function.
> 
> Why did you resend it immediately?

I'm also puzzled with this. It's not the first time you resend the lot for
the unknown reasons.

> And what is the reason for this change?

First of all, it's Suggested-by: me (missed tag), second, it should be a part
of the patch set to answer your question.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko