From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Grant Likely Subject: Re: [PATCH] of: spi: Export single device registration method =?iso-8859-1?Q?and=0D?= accessors (v2) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2014 15:33:29 +0000 Message-ID: <20141121153329.C4DDDC40D85@trevor.secretlab.ca> References: <1414572037-11306-1-git-send-email-pantelis.antoniou@konsulko.com> <20141029101420.GT18557@sirena.org.uk> <6A3753C0-251A-4645-AD96-CB1D6521175F@antoniou-consulting.com> <20141029122204.GG18557@sirena.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Alexander Sverdlin , Rob Herring , Stephen Warren , Matt Porter , Koen Kooi , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Alison Chaiken , Dinh Nguyen , Jan Lubbe , Michael Stickel , Guenter Roeck , Dirk Behme , Alan Tull , Sascha Hauer , Michael Bohan , Ionut Nicu , Michal Simek , Matt Ranostay , Joel Becker , devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Wolfram Sang , linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-spi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel , Pantelis Antoniou Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20141029122204.GG18557-GFdadSzt00ze9xe1eoZjHA@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-i2c-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-spi.vger.kernel.org On Wed, 29 Oct 2014 12:22:04 +0000 , Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 01:48:06PM +0200, Pantelis Antoniou wrote: > > > On Oct 29, 2014, at 12:14 , Mark Brown wrote= : >=20 > > > This feels like there is an abstraction problem somewhere, whatev= er code > > > is supposed to use this is going to need to be taught about each > > > individual bus which is going to be tedious, I would expect that = we'd > > > have something like the bus being able to provide a callback whic= h will > > > get invoked whenever a new node appears on the parent node for th= e bus. >=20 > > There=E2=80=99s a whole patchset that does exactly this.=20 > > Look at "OF: spi: Add OF notifier handler=E2=80=9D and you=E2=80=99= ll where this is used. >=20 > I deleted that unread I'm afraid; one of the reasons that you should = use > subject lines matching the styles for the subsystems is that it's one= of > the things people use to filter out things that actually need attenti= on, > if things are busy things that at first glance don't look terribly > relevant (like changes to the OF core in this case) are likely to get > looked at less urgently or just skipped. >=20 > A quick glance suggests that this is adding code inside the SPI core = so > it's still not explaining why anything is being exported, can you > clarify please? I have the same question. This doesn't look like it should be exporting symbols. Also, the way the patch is written causes a lot of code changes to get interleaved in the diff. It would be better to split into two patches; one that creates the new of_register_spi_device(), and a separate patch to add the other new functions. It would be certainly easier to review that way. >=20 > > > SubmittingPatches says. Please also try to keep your CC list san= e, > > > CCing random people just means that you're increasing the volume = of mail > > > they have to process. I'm surprised kernel.org accepts so many C= Cs. >=20 > > > I have to say I don't recall ever seeing v1... >=20 > > All of them are in the CC list for a reason.=20 >=20 > This is a single, standalone SPI patch - you didn't send it as part o= f a > series (which is the only reason I read it). Yes, this is part of the OF overlay series. It should have at least bee= n marked as [PATCH 7/8] and that it replaced the previous, buggy, patch 7= =2E g.