linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/mediatek/hdmi: Simplify with dev_err

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: <a65b01d8-3716-40bb-9171-ad6ed3121a89@linaro.org>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2025 11:07:32 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>,
 Chun-Kuang Hu <chunkuang.hu@...nel.org>,
 Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>, David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
 Simona Vetter <simona@...ll.ch>, Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
 dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm/mediatek/hdmi: Simplify with dev_err_probe

On 12/02/2025 21:33, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 13/01/2025 14:48, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
>> Il 13/01/25 14:07, Krzysztof Kozlowski ha scritto:
>>> On 13/01/2025 13:41, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
>>>> Il 12/01/25 14:47, Krzysztof Kozlowski ha scritto:
>>>>> Use dev_err_probe() to make error code and deferred probe handling
>>>>> simpler.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That's already done in [1] so you can drop this commit.
>>>>
>>>> [1]:
>>>> https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250108112744.64686-1-angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com
>>>>
>>> Eh, this was first in v3 in the middle of Dec, so why you cannot get it
>>> merged first? Creating such 34-behemoths causes simple cleanups to
>>> unnecessarily wait.
>>>
>>
>> Getting the series partially merged is okay for me, no complaints about that,
>> but then ... in v4, there are two minor comments to address (one of which
>> is a one-char nitpick!) that might as well be done while applying, depending
>> on what CK thinks about that, so there's no real benefit in getting 28 commits
>> out of 34 picked instead of, well, just everything...
>>
> 
> OK, month passed, I waited, so is your big patchset merged? If it is,
> then this will effectively rebase my patch, as you requested.

I think I missed that you took the patch to your patchset, so sorry for
the noise.

Best regards,
Krzysztof