Re: [PATCH 00/40] soc: Convert to platform remove callback returning void - Uwe Kleine-König

From: "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
To: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@kernel.org>
Cc: "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@arndb.de>, "Nishanth Menon" <nm@ti.com>,
	"Herve Codina" <herve.codina@bootlin.com>,
	"Heiko Stübner" <heiko@sntech.de>,
	"Mateusz Holenko" <mholenko@antmicro.com>,
	"Muhammad Usama Anjum" <usama.anjum@collabora.com>,
	linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org,
	"Conor.Dooley" <conor.dooley@microchip.com>,
	"Thierry Reding" <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
	"Alim Akhtar" <alim.akhtar@samsung.com>,
	linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
	"Karol Gugala" <kgugala@antmicro.com>,
	"Qiang Zhao" <qiang.zhao@nxp.com>,
	"Hitomi Hasegawa" <hasegawa-hitomi@fujitsu.com>,
	"Rob Herring" <robh@kernel.org>,
	linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-aspeed@lists.ozlabs.org,
	"Ruan Jinjie" <ruanjinjie@huawei.com>,
	"Yinbo Zhu" <zhuyinbo@loongson.cn>,
	"Jon Hunter" <jonathanh@nvidia.com>,
	linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org,
	"Gabriel Somlo" <gsomlo@gmail.com>,
	"Andy Gross" <agross@kernel.org>,
	"Huisong Li" <lihuisong@huawei.com>,
	"Joel Stanley" <joel@jms.id.au>,
	"Sumit Gupta" <sumitg@nvidia.com>,
	"zhang.songyi" <zhang.songyi@zte.com.cn>,
	"Zev Weiss" <zev@bewilderbeest.net>,
	linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
	"Yang Yingliang" <yangyingliang@huawei.com>,
	"Lubomir Rintel" <lkundrak@v3.sk>,
	"Krzysztof Halasa" <khalasa@piap.pl>,
	loongarch@lists.linux.dev,
	"Santosh Shilimkar" <ssantosh@kernel.org>,
	"Matthias Brugger" <matthias.bgg@gmail.com>,
	"Michal Simek" <michal.simek@amd.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	"AngeloGioacchino Del Regno"
	<angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>,
	"Daire McNamara" <daire.mcnamara@microchip.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	"Shang XiaoJing" <shangxiaojing@huawei.com>,
	"Leo Li" <leoyang.li@nxp.com>,
	"Konrad Dybcio" <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>,
	"Andrew Jeffery" <andrew@aj.id.au>,
	"Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>,
	"Pengutronix Kernel Team" <kernel@pengutronix.de>,
	linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org,
	"Nick Alcock" <nick.alcock@oracle.com>,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/40] soc: Convert to platform remove callback returning void
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2023 08:14:49 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230928061449.xxqhyyrg6e357dn2@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f4hvrslynlgmxu4a2gogc5idvumskhaalxgwildy56yqk2wz7d@lkh4swkv52mi>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2272 bytes --]

On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 04:01:58PM -0700, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 10:43:16AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 27, 2023, at 04:25, Joel Stanley wrote:
> > > On Mon, 25 Sept 2023 at 09:55, Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> this series converts all platform drivers below drivers/soc to use
> > >> .remove_new(). The motivation is to get rid of an integer return code
> > >> that is (mostly) ignored by the platform driver core and error prone on
> > >> the driver side.
> > >>
> > >> See commit 5c5a7680e67b ("platform: Provide a remove callback that
> > >> returns no value") for an extended explanation and the eventual goal.
> > >>
> > >> As there is no single maintainer team for drivers/soc, I suggest the
> > >> individual maintainers to pick up "their" patches.
> > >
> > > I'd be happy if Arnd merged the lot at once. Arnd, what do you think?
> > >
> > > If that will be too messy then I understand. I have queued the aspeed
> > > ones locally and will push that out if we decide that's the best way
> > > to go.
> > 
> > The main downside of merging it all at once through the soc tree
> > is that there may be patches that conflict with other work going on
> > in individual drivers.
> > 
> > What I'd suggest doing here is:
> > 
> > - have platform maintainers pick up patches for their drivers
> >   if that is their preference for any reason
> 
> I'd prefer this for the qcom drivers at least, please let me know if you
> would like me to proceed.

I can send a pull request as Arnd suggested. So iff you want the qcom
drivers not be a part of that PR, just make sure they appear in next
during the next week. :-)

(I'm not sure if "this" in your last quoted sentence is "platform
maintainers pick up" or "merging it all at once through the soc tree". I
think you mean the former. Still if you don't want me to pick up the
qcom patches and won't manage to make them appear in next via your tree,
I ask you to tell me explicitly to skip these in my PR.)

Best regards and thanks,
Uwe

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Uwe Kleine-König            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]