From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] TTY: Add TTY slave enumeration support Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2013 23:46:03 -0500 Message-ID: <20130130044603.GC30002@kroah.com> References: <12848b50e1096dc11a193694ee248d51d45ce093.1359022955.git.lv.zheng@intel.com> <20130125214121.GA30924@kroah.com> <1AE640813FDE7649BE1B193DEA596E88BF41C7@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> <20130126034232.GB5066@kroah.com> <1AE640813FDE7649BE1B193DEA596E88BF46D2@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1AE640813FDE7649BE1B193DEA596E88BF46D2@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com> Sender: linux-serial-owner@vger.kernel.org To: "Zheng, Lv" Cc: Alan Cox , "Wysocki, Rafael J" , "Brown, Len" , Mika Westerberg , "linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-serial@vger.kernel.org" , "Jiri Slaby (jslaby@suse.cz)" , "Heikki Krogerus (heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com)" List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 02:58:00AM +0000, Zheng, Lv wrote: > Which one do you think is better? V2 or V5 (I have completed the test > and now I have the V6 ones, I can send them out if you think the > tty_enum bus is better than the serial_bus). I don't know, if you have a patch set you want to have reviewed, please send it, I don't have the time to dig through the links you sent me to old patch versions, nor should you ever expect someone to do that. But whatever you send, it better not contain a duplicate of the existing tty class code, like your last patchset did, that's not going to be acceptable at all for the reasons I said. Again, take advantage of your Intel internal Linux kernel developers for the proper review of your code, and test it! Your last patch set showed that this obviously did not happen, and I'm not going to look at anything further from you until you get a signed-off-by by at least one of them first (preferably more than one.) greg k-h