[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7064597b-caf7-42e2-b083-b3531e874200@prolan.hu>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2025 09:26:28 +0100
From: Csókás Bence <csokas.bence@...lan.hu>
To: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>, <dmaengine@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-sunxi@...ts.linux.dev>, <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
CC: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...nel.org>,
Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>, Christophe Jaillet
<christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>, Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@...il.com>,
Samuel Holland <samuel@...lland.org>, Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] dma-engine: sun4i: Simplify error handling in probe()
Hi,
On 2025. 03. 24. 18:55, Markus Elfring wrote:
>> Clean up error handling by using devm functions and dev_err_probe().
> …
>
> Do any contributors care for a different patch granularity?
> https://web.git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?h=v6.14#n81
I still don't understand why you are so adamant on this. It is just a
simple refactor patch changing 33 lines, mostly in one function, with no
logic change. Does it break something in your system? Please explain
yourself so we can understand your viewpoint better.
> Will it be clearer to mention also the function name “sun4i_dma_probe”
> in the summary phrases?
I already added it as per your last response, did you not read the message?
On 2025. 03. 24. 18:20, Bence Csókás wrote:
> Clean up error handling by using devm functions and dev_err_probe(). This
> should make it easier to add new code, as we can eliminate the "goto
> ladder" in sun4i_dma_probe().
Bence
Powered by blists - more mailing lists