From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: Rikard Falkeborn <rikard.falkeborn@gmail.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] cpufreq: arm_scmi: Constify scmi_perf_ops pointers
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2020 11:44:18 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200907104418.GC17330@bogus> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200907102551.3f7zwrmd3uqthaxs@vireshk-i7>
On Mon, Sep 07, 2020 at 03:55:51PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 07-09-20, 11:22, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> > Hi Viresh,
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 07, 2020 at 01:04:50AM +0200, Rikard Falkeborn wrote:
> > > The perf_ops are not modified through this pointer. Make them const to
> > > indicate that. This is in preparation to make the scmi-ops pointers in
> > > scmi_handle const.
> > >
> >
> > Your ack needed to take this as series via {arm-,}soc
>
> Can I just pick the first patch and you do the rest ? Will it result
> in any warnings at either end ?
>
Initially I thought out suggesting the same, but then I realised(not
checked though), without this change in arm-soc the scmi-cpufreq driver
might produce warnings as the const value gets assigned to non const.
No ?
--
Regards,
Sudeep
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-09-07 10:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-09-06 23:04 [PATCH 0/3] arm_scmi: Constify ops pointers in struct scmi_handle Rikard Falkeborn
2020-09-06 23:04 ` [PATCH 1/3] cpufreq: arm_scmi: Constify scmi_perf_ops pointers Rikard Falkeborn
2020-09-07 10:22 ` Sudeep Holla
2020-09-07 10:25 ` Viresh Kumar
2020-09-07 10:44 ` Sudeep Holla [this message]
2020-09-07 10:46 ` Viresh Kumar
2020-09-06 23:04 ` [PATCH 2/3] firmware: arm_scmi: Constify ops pointers in scmi_handle Rikard Falkeborn
2020-09-06 23:04 ` [PATCH 3/3] firmware: arm_scmi: Constify static scmi-ops Rikard Falkeborn
2020-09-08 12:51 ` [PATCH 0/3] arm_scmi: Constify ops pointers in struct scmi_handle Sudeep Holla
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=20200907104418.GC17330@bogus \
--to=sudeep.holla@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rikard.falkeborn@gmail.com \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).