From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
To: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
<sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>,
wharms@bfs.de
Cc: dan.carpenter@oracle.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, david.a.cohen@linux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] intel-mid: Fix sfi get_platform_data() return value issues
Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2016 12:15:09 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1473250509.11323.60.camel@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1473210255-227672-1-git-send-email-sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>
On Tue, 2016-09-06 at 18:04 -0700, Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan wrote:
> According to the intel_mid_sfi_get_pdata() function definition,
> get_platform_data() function should returns NULL on no platform
> data scenario and return ERR_PTR on platform data initialization
> failures. But current device platform initialization code does not
> follow this requirement. This patch fixes the return values issues
> in various sfi device libs code.
I'm fine with this as long as it doesn't prevent booting.
See also comments below.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@
> linux.intel.com>
> ---
> .../platform/intel-mid/device_libs/platform_lis331.c | 13
> +++++++++----
> .../platform/intel-mid/device_libs/platform_max7315.c | 9 ++++++
> ---
> .../platform/intel-mid/device_libs/platform_mpu3050.c | 7 +++++--
> .../platform/intel-mid/device_libs/platform_pcal9555a.c | 8 +++++---
> .../platform/intel-mid/device_libs/platform_tca6416.c | 7 +++++--
> arch/x86/platform/intel-mid/sfi.c | 17
> +++++++++++++----
> 6 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/platform/intel-mid/device_libs/platform_lis331.c
> b/arch/x86/platform/intel-mid/device_libs/platform_lis331.c
> index a35cf91..2fd200b 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/platform/intel-mid/device_libs/platform_lis331.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/platform/intel-mid/device_libs/platform_lis331.c
> @@ -21,10 +21,15 @@ static void __init *lis331dl_platform_data(void
> *info)
> int intr = get_gpio_by_name("accel_int");
> int intr2nd = get_gpio_by_name("accel_2");
>
> - if (intr < 0)
> - return NULL;
> - if (intr2nd < 0)
> - return NULL;
> + if (intr < 0) {
> + pr_err("%s: invalid interrupt1 error\n", __func__);
I would rephrase to something like
#define LIS331DL_ACCEL_INT "accel_int"
...
pr_err("%s: Can't find %s GPIO interrupt\n", __func__,
LIS331DL_ACCEL_INT);
> + return ERR_PTR(intr);
> + }
> +
> + if (intr2nd < 0) {
> + pr_err("%s: invalid interrupt2 error\n", __func__);
Ditto.
> + return ERR_PTR(intr2nd);
> + }
>
> i2c_info->irq = intr + INTEL_MID_IRQ_OFFSET;
> intr2nd_pdata = intr2nd + INTEL_MID_IRQ_OFFSET;
> diff --git a/arch/x86/platform/intel-
> mid/device_libs/platform_max7315.c b/arch/x86/platform/intel-
> mid/device_libs/platform_max7315.c
> index 6e075af..cc20dfc 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/platform/intel-mid/device_libs/platform_max7315.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/platform/intel-mid/device_libs/platform_max7315.c
> @@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ static void __init *max7315_platform_data(void
> *info)
> if (nr = MAX7315_NUM) {
> pr_err("too many max7315s, we only support %d\n",
> MAX7315_NUM);
"%s: too many instances, we only support %d\n", __func__, MAX7315_NUM
> - return NULL;
> + return ERR_PTR(-ENODEV);
-ENOMEM
> }
> /* we have several max7315 on the board, we only need load
> several
> * instances of the same pca953x driver to cover them
> @@ -48,8 +48,11 @@ static void __init *max7315_platform_data(void
> *info)
> gpio_base = get_gpio_by_name(base_pin_name);
> intr = get_gpio_by_name(intr_pin_name);
>
> - if (gpio_base < 0)
> - return NULL;
> + if (gpio_base < 0) {
> + pr_err("%s: invalid gpio base error\n", __func__);
> + return ERR_PTR(gpio_base);
"Unknown GPIO base, falling back to dynamic allocation"
Would it work like that? (Needs more work on patch, perhaps separate
patch)
> + }
> +
> max7315->gpio_base = gpio_base;
> if (intr != -1) {
> i2c_info->irq = intr + INTEL_MID_IRQ_OFFSET;
> diff --git a/arch/x86/platform/intel-
> mid/device_libs/platform_mpu3050.c b/arch/x86/platform/intel-
> mid/device_libs/platform_mpu3050.c
> index ee22864..2008824 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/platform/intel-mid/device_libs/platform_mpu3050.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/platform/intel-mid/device_libs/platform_mpu3050.c
> @@ -19,10 +19,13 @@ static void *mpu3050_platform_data(void *info)
> struct i2c_board_info *i2c_info = info;
> int intr = get_gpio_by_name("mpu3050_int");
>
> - if (intr < 0)
> - return NULL;
> + if (intr < 0) {
> + pr_err("%s: invalid interrupt error\n", __func__);
pr_err("%s: Can't find %s GPIO interrupt\n", __func__, MPU3050_INT);
> + return ERR_PTR(intr);
> + }
>
> i2c_info->irq = intr + INTEL_MID_IRQ_OFFSET;
> +
> return NULL;
> }
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/platform/intel-
> mid/device_libs/platform_pcal9555a.c b/arch/x86/platform/intel-
> mid/device_libs/platform_pcal9555a.c
> index 429a941..97e92a2 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/platform/intel-mid/device_libs/platform_pcal9555a.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/platform/intel-mid/device_libs/platform_pcal9555a.c
> @@ -41,13 +41,15 @@ static void __init *pcal9555a_platform_data(void
> *info)
> intr = get_gpio_by_name(intr_pin_name);
>
> /* Check if the SFI record valid */
> - if (gpio_base = -1)
> - return NULL;
> + if (gpio_base = -1) {
> + pr_err("%s: invalid gpio base error\n", __func__);
> + return ERR_PTR(gpio_base);
Same as above for gpio_base.
> + }
>
> if (nr >= PCAL9555A_NUM) {
> pr_err("%s: Too many instances, only %d supported\n",
> __func__,
> PCAL9555A_NUM);
> - return NULL;
> + return ERR_PTR(-ENODEV);
-ENOMEM
> }
>
> pcal9555a = &pcal9555a_pdata[nr++];
> diff --git a/arch/x86/platform/intel-
> mid/device_libs/platform_tca6416.c b/arch/x86/platform/intel-
> mid/device_libs/platform_tca6416.c
> index 4f41372..2796956 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/platform/intel-mid/device_libs/platform_tca6416.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/platform/intel-mid/device_libs/platform_tca6416.c
> @@ -34,8 +34,11 @@ static void *tca6416_platform_data(void *info)
> gpio_base = get_gpio_by_name(base_pin_name);
> intr = get_gpio_by_name(intr_pin_name);
>
> - if (gpio_base < 0)
> - return NULL;
> + if (gpio_base < 0) {
> + pr_err("%s: invalid gpio base error\n", __func__);
> + return ERR_PTR(gpio_base);
Same as above for gpio_base.
> + }
> +
> tca6416.gpio_base = gpio_base;
> if (intr >= 0) {
> i2c_info->irq = intr + INTEL_MID_IRQ_OFFSET;
> diff --git a/arch/x86/platform/intel-mid/sfi.c
> b/arch/x86/platform/intel-mid/sfi.c
> index 051d264..8e7361f 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/platform/intel-mid/sfi.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/platform/intel-mid/sfi.c
> @@ -335,9 +335,12 @@ static void __init sfi_handle_ipc_dev(struct
> sfi_device_table_entry *pentry,
>
> pr_debug("IPC bus, name = %16.16s, irq = 0x%2x\n",
> pentry->name, pentry->irq);
> +
> pdata = intel_mid_sfi_get_pdata(dev, pentry);
> - if (IS_ERR(pdata))
> + if (IS_ERR(pdata)) {
> + pr_err("ipc_device: %s: invalid platform data\n",
> pentry->name);
> return;
> + }
This is actually needs more work. We have duplication in sfi.c and
platform_ipc.c.
>
> pdev = platform_device_alloc(pentry->name, 0);
> if (pdev = NULL) {
> @@ -371,8 +374,10 @@ static void __init sfi_handle_spi_dev(struct
> sfi_device_table_entry *pentry,
> spi_info.chip_select);
>
> pdata = intel_mid_sfi_get_pdata(dev, &spi_info);
> - if (IS_ERR(pdata))
> + if (IS_ERR(pdata)) {
>
> + pr_err("spi_device: %s: invalid platform data\n",
> pentry->name);
Since you print messages in device_libs files I would drop this one
because it has no value. OTOH you can move it to debug level and
rephrase:
pr_debug("%s: Can't get platform data for %s\n", __func__ [or "SPI
..."], pentry->name);
> return;
> + }
>
> spi_info.platform_data = pdata;
> if (dev->delay)
> @@ -398,8 +403,10 @@ static void __init sfi_handle_i2c_dev(struct
> sfi_device_table_entry *pentry,
> i2c_info.addr);
> pdata = intel_mid_sfi_get_pdata(dev, &i2c_info);
> i2c_info.platform_data = pdata;
> - if (IS_ERR(pdata))
> + if (IS_ERR(pdata)) {
> + pr_err("i2c_device: %s: invalid platform data\n",
> pentry->name);
> return;
Ditto.
> + }
>
> if (dev->delay)
> intel_scu_i2c_device_register(pentry->host_num,
> &i2c_info);
> @@ -424,8 +431,10 @@ static void __init sfi_handle_sd_dev(struct
> sfi_device_table_entry *pentry,
> sd_info.max_clk,
> sd_info.addr);
> pdata = intel_mid_sfi_get_pdata(dev, &sd_info);
> - if (IS_ERR(pdata))
> + if (IS_ERR(pdata)) {
> + pr_err("sd_device: %s: invalid platform data\n",
> pentry->name);
> return;
> + }
Ditto.
>
> /* Nothing we can do with this for now */
> sd_info.platform_data = pdata;
--
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Intel Finland Oy
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
To: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
<sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>,
wharms@bfs.de
Cc: dan.carpenter@oracle.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, david.a.cohen@linux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] intel-mid: Fix sfi get_platform_data() return value issues
Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2016 15:15:09 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1473250509.11323.60.camel@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1473210255-227672-1-git-send-email-sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>
On Tue, 2016-09-06 at 18:04 -0700, Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan wrote:
> According to the intel_mid_sfi_get_pdata() function definition,
> get_platform_data() function should returns NULL on no platform
> data scenario and return ERR_PTR on platform data initialization
> failures. But current device platform initialization code does not
> follow this requirement. This patch fixes the return values issues
> in various sfi device libs code.
I'm fine with this as long as it doesn't prevent booting.
See also comments below.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@
> linux.intel.com>
> ---
> .../platform/intel-mid/device_libs/platform_lis331.c | 13
> +++++++++----
> .../platform/intel-mid/device_libs/platform_max7315.c | 9 ++++++
> ---
> .../platform/intel-mid/device_libs/platform_mpu3050.c | 7 +++++--
> .../platform/intel-mid/device_libs/platform_pcal9555a.c | 8 +++++---
> .../platform/intel-mid/device_libs/platform_tca6416.c | 7 +++++--
> arch/x86/platform/intel-mid/sfi.c | 17
> +++++++++++++----
> 6 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/platform/intel-mid/device_libs/platform_lis331.c
> b/arch/x86/platform/intel-mid/device_libs/platform_lis331.c
> index a35cf91..2fd200b 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/platform/intel-mid/device_libs/platform_lis331.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/platform/intel-mid/device_libs/platform_lis331.c
> @@ -21,10 +21,15 @@ static void __init *lis331dl_platform_data(void
> *info)
> int intr = get_gpio_by_name("accel_int");
> int intr2nd = get_gpio_by_name("accel_2");
>
> - if (intr < 0)
> - return NULL;
> - if (intr2nd < 0)
> - return NULL;
> + if (intr < 0) {
> + pr_err("%s: invalid interrupt1 error\n", __func__);
I would rephrase to something like
#define LIS331DL_ACCEL_INT "accel_int"
...
pr_err("%s: Can't find %s GPIO interrupt\n", __func__,
LIS331DL_ACCEL_INT);
> + return ERR_PTR(intr);
> + }
> +
> + if (intr2nd < 0) {
> + pr_err("%s: invalid interrupt2 error\n", __func__);
Ditto.
> + return ERR_PTR(intr2nd);
> + }
>
> i2c_info->irq = intr + INTEL_MID_IRQ_OFFSET;
> intr2nd_pdata = intr2nd + INTEL_MID_IRQ_OFFSET;
> diff --git a/arch/x86/platform/intel-
> mid/device_libs/platform_max7315.c b/arch/x86/platform/intel-
> mid/device_libs/platform_max7315.c
> index 6e075af..cc20dfc 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/platform/intel-mid/device_libs/platform_max7315.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/platform/intel-mid/device_libs/platform_max7315.c
> @@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ static void __init *max7315_platform_data(void
> *info)
> if (nr == MAX7315_NUM) {
> pr_err("too many max7315s, we only support %d\n",
> MAX7315_NUM);
"%s: too many instances, we only support %d\n", __func__, MAX7315_NUM
> - return NULL;
> + return ERR_PTR(-ENODEV);
-ENOMEM
> }
> /* we have several max7315 on the board, we only need load
> several
> * instances of the same pca953x driver to cover them
> @@ -48,8 +48,11 @@ static void __init *max7315_platform_data(void
> *info)
> gpio_base = get_gpio_by_name(base_pin_name);
> intr = get_gpio_by_name(intr_pin_name);
>
> - if (gpio_base < 0)
> - return NULL;
> + if (gpio_base < 0) {
> + pr_err("%s: invalid gpio base error\n", __func__);
> + return ERR_PTR(gpio_base);
"Unknown GPIO base, falling back to dynamic allocation"
Would it work like that? (Needs more work on patch, perhaps separate
patch)
> + }
> +
> max7315->gpio_base = gpio_base;
> if (intr != -1) {
> i2c_info->irq = intr + INTEL_MID_IRQ_OFFSET;
> diff --git a/arch/x86/platform/intel-
> mid/device_libs/platform_mpu3050.c b/arch/x86/platform/intel-
> mid/device_libs/platform_mpu3050.c
> index ee22864..2008824 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/platform/intel-mid/device_libs/platform_mpu3050.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/platform/intel-mid/device_libs/platform_mpu3050.c
> @@ -19,10 +19,13 @@ static void *mpu3050_platform_data(void *info)
> struct i2c_board_info *i2c_info = info;
> int intr = get_gpio_by_name("mpu3050_int");
>
> - if (intr < 0)
> - return NULL;
> + if (intr < 0) {
> + pr_err("%s: invalid interrupt error\n", __func__);
pr_err("%s: Can't find %s GPIO interrupt\n", __func__, MPU3050_INT);
> + return ERR_PTR(intr);
> + }
>
> i2c_info->irq = intr + INTEL_MID_IRQ_OFFSET;
> +
> return NULL;
> }
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/platform/intel-
> mid/device_libs/platform_pcal9555a.c b/arch/x86/platform/intel-
> mid/device_libs/platform_pcal9555a.c
> index 429a941..97e92a2 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/platform/intel-mid/device_libs/platform_pcal9555a.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/platform/intel-mid/device_libs/platform_pcal9555a.c
> @@ -41,13 +41,15 @@ static void __init *pcal9555a_platform_data(void
> *info)
> intr = get_gpio_by_name(intr_pin_name);
>
> /* Check if the SFI record valid */
> - if (gpio_base == -1)
> - return NULL;
> + if (gpio_base == -1) {
> + pr_err("%s: invalid gpio base error\n", __func__);
> + return ERR_PTR(gpio_base);
Same as above for gpio_base.
> + }
>
> if (nr >= PCAL9555A_NUM) {
> pr_err("%s: Too many instances, only %d supported\n",
> __func__,
> PCAL9555A_NUM);
> - return NULL;
> + return ERR_PTR(-ENODEV);
-ENOMEM
> }
>
> pcal9555a = &pcal9555a_pdata[nr++];
> diff --git a/arch/x86/platform/intel-
> mid/device_libs/platform_tca6416.c b/arch/x86/platform/intel-
> mid/device_libs/platform_tca6416.c
> index 4f41372..2796956 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/platform/intel-mid/device_libs/platform_tca6416.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/platform/intel-mid/device_libs/platform_tca6416.c
> @@ -34,8 +34,11 @@ static void *tca6416_platform_data(void *info)
> gpio_base = get_gpio_by_name(base_pin_name);
> intr = get_gpio_by_name(intr_pin_name);
>
> - if (gpio_base < 0)
> - return NULL;
> + if (gpio_base < 0) {
> + pr_err("%s: invalid gpio base error\n", __func__);
> + return ERR_PTR(gpio_base);
Same as above for gpio_base.
> + }
> +
> tca6416.gpio_base = gpio_base;
> if (intr >= 0) {
> i2c_info->irq = intr + INTEL_MID_IRQ_OFFSET;
> diff --git a/arch/x86/platform/intel-mid/sfi.c
> b/arch/x86/platform/intel-mid/sfi.c
> index 051d264..8e7361f 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/platform/intel-mid/sfi.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/platform/intel-mid/sfi.c
> @@ -335,9 +335,12 @@ static void __init sfi_handle_ipc_dev(struct
> sfi_device_table_entry *pentry,
>
> pr_debug("IPC bus, name = %16.16s, irq = 0x%2x\n",
> pentry->name, pentry->irq);
> +
> pdata = intel_mid_sfi_get_pdata(dev, pentry);
> - if (IS_ERR(pdata))
> + if (IS_ERR(pdata)) {
> + pr_err("ipc_device: %s: invalid platform data\n",
> pentry->name);
> return;
> + }
This is actually needs more work. We have duplication in sfi.c and
platform_ipc.c.
>
> pdev = platform_device_alloc(pentry->name, 0);
> if (pdev == NULL) {
> @@ -371,8 +374,10 @@ static void __init sfi_handle_spi_dev(struct
> sfi_device_table_entry *pentry,
> spi_info.chip_select);
>
> pdata = intel_mid_sfi_get_pdata(dev, &spi_info);
> - if (IS_ERR(pdata))
> + if (IS_ERR(pdata)) {
>
> + pr_err("spi_device: %s: invalid platform data\n",
> pentry->name);
Since you print messages in device_libs files I would drop this one
because it has no value. OTOH you can move it to debug level and
rephrase:
pr_debug("%s: Can't get platform data for %s\n", __func__ [or "SPI
..."], pentry->name);
> return;
> + }
>
> spi_info.platform_data = pdata;
> if (dev->delay)
> @@ -398,8 +403,10 @@ static void __init sfi_handle_i2c_dev(struct
> sfi_device_table_entry *pentry,
> i2c_info.addr);
> pdata = intel_mid_sfi_get_pdata(dev, &i2c_info);
> i2c_info.platform_data = pdata;
> - if (IS_ERR(pdata))
> + if (IS_ERR(pdata)) {
> + pr_err("i2c_device: %s: invalid platform data\n",
> pentry->name);
> return;
Ditto.
> + }
>
> if (dev->delay)
> intel_scu_i2c_device_register(pentry->host_num,
> &i2c_info);
> @@ -424,8 +431,10 @@ static void __init sfi_handle_sd_dev(struct
> sfi_device_table_entry *pentry,
> sd_info.max_clk,
> sd_info.addr);
> pdata = intel_mid_sfi_get_pdata(dev, &sd_info);
> - if (IS_ERR(pdata))
> + if (IS_ERR(pdata)) {
> + pr_err("sd_device: %s: invalid platform data\n",
> pentry->name);
> return;
> + }
Ditto.
>
> /* Nothing we can do with this for now */
> sd_info.platform_data = pdata;
--
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Intel Finland Oy
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-09-07 12:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-07-15 19:23 [bug report] x86/sfi: Enable enumeration of SD devices Dan Carpenter
2016-08-09 15:32 ` Andy Shevchenko
2016-08-09 17:58 ` Dan Carpenter
2016-08-28 13:31 ` Andy Shevchenko
2016-08-29 20:59 ` Kuppuswamy, Sathyanarayanan
2016-08-30 9:46 ` Andy Shevchenko
2016-08-30 11:06 ` walter harms
2016-08-30 11:13 ` Andy Shevchenko
2016-08-30 18:18 ` Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy
2016-09-07 1:04 ` [PATCH 1/1] intel-mid: Fix sfi get_platform_data() return value issues Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2016-09-07 1:04 ` Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2016-09-07 12:15 ` Andy Shevchenko [this message]
2016-09-07 12:15 ` Andy Shevchenko
2016-09-08 0:04 ` sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy
2016-09-08 0:04 ` sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy
2016-09-08 9:49 ` Andy Shevchenko
2016-09-08 9:49 ` Andy Shevchenko
2016-09-08 0:05 ` [PATCH v2 " Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2016-09-08 0:05 ` Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2016-09-08 12:51 ` Andy Shevchenko
2016-09-08 12:51 ` Andy Shevchenko
2016-09-08 22:41 ` sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy
2016-09-08 22:41 ` sathyanarayanan kuppuswamy
2016-09-09 11:20 ` Andy Shevchenko
2016-09-09 11:20 ` Andy Shevchenko
2016-09-09 2:07 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] " Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2016-09-09 2:07 ` Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2016-09-09 2:07 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] intel-mid: Add valid error messages on init failure Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2016-09-09 2:07 ` Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2016-09-09 11:27 ` Andy Shevchenko
2016-09-09 11:27 ` Andy Shevchenko
2016-09-09 2:07 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] intel-mid: Move boundry check to the start of init code Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2016-09-09 2:07 ` Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan
2016-09-09 11:30 ` Andy Shevchenko
2016-09-09 11:30 ` Andy Shevchenko
2016-09-01 13:17 ` [bug report] x86/sfi: Enable enumeration of SD devices Andy Shevchenko
2016-09-07 0:51 ` Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy
2016-09-07 12:00 ` Andy Shevchenko
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=1473250509.11323.60.camel@linux.intel.com \
--to=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dan.carpenter@oracle.com \
--cc=david.a.cohen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com \
--cc=wharms@bfs.de \
/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.