All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Wolfram Sang <wsa@kernel.org>
To: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>
Cc: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>,
	linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org,
	Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>, Sean Nyekjaer <sean@geanix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] i2c: core: Add stub for i2c_verify_client() if !CONFIG_I2C
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2021 13:55:59 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YLjDT1sxNm9ehjey@shikoro> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210603122436.00003539@Huawei.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1746 bytes --]

Hi Jonathan

> Ok, so that is there because my assumption was that mostly like I'd take
> this patch through IIO, in which case it's directly valid and necessary
> for backport information purposes.  I'm guessing this one is unlikely to
> cause merge conflicts given how localized it is...

I see. Makes sense.

> You would do an immutable branch that I can pull into IIO. I'd really like
> to avoid rebasing the IIO tree unless absolutely necessary as people are
> working on top if it.

Sure, let's avoid rebasing.

> Doesn't work.  There is a high chance the original patch will get ported
> back to earlier kernels and there is no reference to let anyone know they
> also need this one to avoid potential build issues on the stable kernel.
> 
> So, if you want to take this through I2C, the path forwards would be.
> 1) You take this one through I2C
> 2) I apply the original fix (which #ifdefs the relevant code out in the
>    driver).
> 3) Once (1) is in mainline next cycle, I can revert (2) on the basis
>    it is no longer necessary.
> 
> I'm fine with doing it this way as it avoids any cross dependencies.

The other solution is that you make an immutable branch for me? IIUC,
this would be easiest? It would work for me.

> > > +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_I2C)  
> > 
> > Hmm, can't we move this into an already existing IS_ENABLED block?
> 
> There aren't any similar #if / #else blocks for CONFIG_I2C in i2c.h
> so it seemed neater to just add one around this individual element
> and not destroy the general organization of the file.

Could be argued. I'd still prefer to add it at line 480 (5.13-rc3) with
the #else branch added if you don't mind.

Thanks and kind regards,

   Wolfram


[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2021-06-03 11:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-05-26 17:44 [PATCH] i2c: core: Add stub for i2c_verify_client() if !CONFIG_I2C Jonathan Cameron
2021-05-27  5:38 ` Sean Nyekjaer
2021-05-27 20:23 ` Wolfram Sang
2021-06-03 11:24   ` Jonathan Cameron
2021-06-03 11:55     ` Wolfram Sang [this message]
2021-06-03 12:42       ` Jonathan Cameron
2021-06-03 16:58 Jonathan Cameron
2021-06-03 19:55 ` Wolfram Sang
2021-06-08 16:22   ` Jonathan Cameron

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=YLjDT1sxNm9ehjey@shikoro \
    --to=wsa@kernel.org \
    --cc=Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com \
    --cc=jic23@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-iio@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sean@geanix.com \
    --cc=trix@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.