Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] resource: Use list_head to link sibling resource

From: Wei Yang <richard.weiyang@gmail.com>
To: Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com>
Cc: nicolas.pitre@linaro.org, "Brijesh Singh" <brijesh.singh@amd.com>,
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org, "David Airlie" <airlied@linux.ie>,
	linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, "Wei Yang" <richard.weiyang@gmail.com>,
	"Keith Busch" <keith.busch@intel.com>,
	"Yaowei Bai" <baiyaowei@cmss.chinamobile.com>,
	"Frank Rowand" <frowand.list@gmail.com>,
	dan.j.williams@intel.com,
	"Lorenzo Pieralisi" <lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com>,
	"Stephen Hemminger" <sthemmin@microsoft.com>,
	linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org,
	"Patrik Jakobsson" <patrik.r.jakobsson@gmail.com>,
	linux-input@vger.kernel.org, "Borislav Petkov" <bp@suse.de>,
	"Tom Lendacky" <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>,
	"Haiyang Zhang" <haiyangz@microsoft.com>,
	josh@joshtriplett.org, "Jérôme Glisse" <jglisse@redhat.com>,
	robh+dt@kernel.org, "Bjorn Helgaas" <bhelgaas@google.com>,
	"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	"Jonathan Derrick" <jonathan.derrick@intel.com>,
	"Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	"Dmitry Torokhov" <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devel@linuxdriverproject.org,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] resource: Use list_head to link sibling resource
Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 08:41:23 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180508234123.GA23307@WeideMacBook-Pro.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180508121123.GI30581@MiWiFi-R3L-srv>

On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 08:11:23PM +0800, Baoquan He wrote:
>On 05/08/18 at 08:48pm, Wei Yang wrote:
>> On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 09:14:29AM +0800, Baoquan He wrote:
>> >Hi Wei Yang,
>> >
>> >On 04/26/18 at 09:18am, Wei Yang wrote:
>> >> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 08:18:46AM +0800, Baoquan He wrote:
>> >> >The struct resource uses singly linked list to link siblings. It's not
>> >> >easy to do reverse iteration on sibling list. So replace it with list_head.
>> >> >
>> >> 
>> >> Hi, Baoquan
>> >> 
>> >> Besides changing the data structure, I have another proposal to do the reverse
>> >> iteration. Which means it would not affect other users, if you just want a
>> >> reverse iteration.
>> >> 
>> >> BTW, I don't think Andrew suggest to use linked-list directly. What he wants
>> >> is a better solution to your first proposal in
>> >> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10300819/.
>> >> 
>> >> Below is my proposal of resource reverse iteration without changing current
>> >> design.
>> >
>> >I got your mail and read it, then interrupted by other thing and forgot
>> >replying, sorry.
>> >
>> >I am fine with your code change. As I said before, I have tried to change
>> >code per reviewers' comment, then let reviewers decide which way is
>> >better. Please feel free to post formal patches and joining discussion
>> >about this issue.
>> 
>> Yep, while I don't have a real requirement to add the reverse version, so what
>> is the proper way to send a patch?
>> 
>> A patch reply to this thread is ok?
>
>I am not sure either. Since my patches are still under reviewing. And
>you have pasted your patch. It depends on maintainers, mainly Andrew and
>other reviewers who have concerns.

Ok, thanks.

-- 
Wei Yang
Help you, Help me
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel