linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] iio: imu: inv

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:
 <FR3P281MB1757AA98627383BC411A35F5CEBD2@FR3P281MB1757.DEUP281.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2025 14:40:50 +0000
From: Jean-Baptiste Maneyrol <Jean-Baptiste.Maneyrol@....com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
CC: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>, Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
        David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com>,
        Nuno Sá
	<nuno.sa@...log.com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>,
        "linux-iio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-iio@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] iio: imu: inv_icm42600: add WoM support

OK, understood.

But for this particular patch, do I need to stay consistent with the existing driver by keeping the standard type or use kernel types and mix with standard types?

Thanks,
JB

________________________________________
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2025 15:06
To: Jean-Baptiste Maneyrol <Jean-Baptiste.Maneyrol@....com>
Cc: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>; Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>; David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com>; Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@...log.com>; Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>; linux-iio@...r.kernel.org <linux-iio@...r.kernel.org>; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] iio: imu: inv_icm42600: add WoM support
 
This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization.
 
On Wed, Apr 16, 2025 at 3:41 PM Jean-Baptiste Maneyrol
<Jean-Baptiste.Maneyrol@....com> wrote:
>
> Hello Andy,
>
> concerning usage of kernel types, my understanding was that we should conform to existing types usage in a driver. That's why I'm keeping the standard types instead of kernel ones. I could change them in the patch, but it would mix usage of both standard and kernel types.
>
> Another thing not related, by reading the coding style documentation I would think that for new driver we can use whatever we prefer between standard types and kernel types. Is it not the case?

It's not for the repositories Greg KH maintaining directly or indirectly:
https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lore.kernel.org/all/20170411140919.GC4388@kroah.com/__;!!FtrhtPsWDhZ6tw!ACor8Q-WyU0CorzLpw0OtWqNk59Wn2Z_s7KKOZuNnglKBzN4jTqb3c6oea83KLER97bFxkEIgSl8_IcKHTxvaRKCUwVCP5wunvo$[lore[.]kernel[.]org]

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko