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
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Rikard Falkeborn <rikard.falkeborn@gmail.com>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
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
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-09-07 10:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ 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 ` Rikard Falkeborn
2020-09-06 23:04 ` [PATCH 1/3] cpufreq: arm_scmi: Constify scmi_perf_ops pointers Rikard Falkeborn
2020-09-06 23:04 ` Rikard Falkeborn
2020-09-07 10:22 ` Sudeep Holla
2020-09-07 10:22 ` Sudeep Holla
2020-09-07 10:25 ` Viresh Kumar
2020-09-07 10:25 ` Viresh Kumar
2020-09-07 10:44 ` Sudeep Holla [this message]
2020-09-07 10:44 ` Sudeep Holla
2020-09-07 10:46 ` Viresh Kumar
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 ` Rikard Falkeborn
2020-09-06 23:04 ` [PATCH 3/3] firmware: arm_scmi: Constify static scmi-ops Rikard Falkeborn
2020-09-06 23:04 ` Rikard Falkeborn
2020-09-08 12:51 ` [PATCH 0/3] arm_scmi: Constify ops pointers in struct scmi_handle Sudeep Holla
2020-09-08 12:51 ` 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 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.