[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aCH-qE8wAY3X0YRK@pollux>
Date: Mon, 12 May 2025 15:59:04 +0200
From: Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>
To: Remo Senekowitsch <remo@...nzli.dev>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>,
Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>,
Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>,
Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me>,
Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...nel.org>,
Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>, Trevor Gross <tmgross@...ch.edu>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Dirk Behme <dirk.behme@...bosch.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/9] rust: device: Create FwNode abstraction for
accessing device properties
On Sun, May 04, 2025 at 07:31:46PM +0200, Remo Senekowitsch wrote:
> Not all property-related APIs can be exposed directly on a device.
> For example, iterating over child nodes of a device will yield
> fwnode_handle. Thus, in order to access properties on these child nodes,
> the property access methods must be implemented on the abstraction over
> fwnode_handle.
This reads as if it is a snippet from a larger text.
Please start with a brief motivation of the patch (even if it is trivial) and,
using imperative mood, what's changed by the patch, then you can add why you do
things a certain way (and not another).
The same applies (more or less) for patch 2.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists