[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y+J3QBuOYSj4ONrh@corigine.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2023 17:07:28 +0100
From: Simon Horman <simon.horman@...igine.com>
To: Kalle Valo <kvalo@...nel.org>
Cc: Bo Liu <liubo03@...pur.com>, johannes@...solutions.net,
davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org,
pabeni@...hat.com, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rfkill: Use sysfs_emit() to instead of sprintf()
On Tue, Feb 07, 2023 at 05:09:02PM +0200, Kalle Valo wrote:
> Simon Horman <simon.horman@...igine.com> writes:
>
> > Hi Bo Liu,
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 01, 2023 at 03:17:18AM -0500, Bo Liu wrote:
> >> Follow the advice of the Documentation/filesystems/sysfs.rst and show()
> >> should only use sysfs_emit() or sysfs_emit_at() when formatting the
> >> value to be returned to user space.
> >
> > Thanks for your patch. As it is not a bug fix it should be targeted at
> > 'net-next' (as opposed to 'net'). This should be specified in the patch
> > subject something like this:
> >
> > [PATCH net-next v2] rfkill: Use sysfs_emit() to instead of sprintf()
>
> rfkill patches should go to wireless-next, right?
Yes, my bad.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists