[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZvNAr0d5gYmuM+Zt@shell.armlinux.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2024 23:43:59 +0100
From: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
To: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Cc: Kunwu Chan <chentao@...inos.cn>, saravanak@...gle.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] amba: Add dev_is_amba() function and export it for
modules
On Tue, Sep 24, 2024 at 05:28:57PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 23, 2024 at 05:42:47PM +0800, Kunwu Chan wrote:
> > Add dev_is_amba() function to determine
> > whether the device is a AMBA device.
> >
> > Suggested-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Kunwu Chan <chentao@...inos.cn>
> > ---
> > drivers/amba/bus.c | 6 ++++++
> > include/linux/amba/bus.h | 5 +++++
> > 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+)
>
> Russell, Can I get an ack for this to take it with patch #2.
Would be nice to discuss "how shall we merge this cross-subsystem
patch series" first, hmm?
The reason I didn't take patch 1 originally is because it was submitted
to me without any users, and the general principle is not to accept
patches without users. Too many times, I've merged code where there's
been a "promise" that it will be used, only to have the author go
silent and users never come along. So now, my rule is... any code that
adds something must also come with its user.
--
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTP is here! 80Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists