Re: [PATCH v1 00/13] serial: 8250_exar: Clean up the driver

[Parker Newman <parker@finest.io>]

On Fri, 3 May 2024 08:36:38 -0400
Parker Newman <parker@finest.io> wrote:

> On Thu, 2 May 2024 21:01:54 +0300
> Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, May 02, 2024 at 01:49:49PM -0400, Parker Newman wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2 May 2024 20:22:47 +0300
> > > Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > > > On Thu, May 02, 2024 at 12:08:40PM -0400, Parker Newman wrote:
> > > > > On Thu, 2 May 2024 19:01:01 +0300
> > > > > Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > > > > > On Thu, May 02, 2024 at 11:46:45AM -0400, Parker Newman wrote:
> > > > > > > On Thu,  2 May 2024 17:43:54 +0300
> > > > > > > Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > After a rework for CONNTECH was done, the driver may need a bit of
> > > > > > > > love in order to become less verbose (in terms of indentation and
> > > > > > > > code duplication) and hence easier to read.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > This clean up series fixes a couple of (not so critical) issues and
> > > > > > > > cleans up the recently added code. No functional change indented by
> > > > > > > > the cleaning up part.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Just an FYI I submitted a patch series that fixed several of these issues but I
> > > > > > > think it fell through the cracks (I know everyone is very busy!).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-serial/cover.1713533298.git.pnewman@connecttech.com/
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I believe my previous patch series is no longer required. This one fixes
> > > > > > > everything.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I haven't noticed that, if it contains duplicated patches, I may replace mine
> > > > > > with yours if you insist.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In any case it's better to reply there that you prefer this series to be
> > > > > > applied, so Greg will not pick it up.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I do not have a preference. I am fine with using yours if it is easier on
> > > > > the maintainers.
> > > >
> > > > Up to you, there is no issue to take your patches in case they are the same
> > > > (or quite similar) as mine. I can pick them up, just tell me if you want this
> > > > to happen with a list of the patches (as mail Message-Id).
> > >
> > > Just use yours.
> >
> > Okay, thanks!
> >
> > If you are going to test, better to pay attention to the BIT() conversion patch
> > as Ilpo noted an issue. I believe it's easy to drop (via local git-rebase run)
> > or move and test separately.
> >
>
> I am working on testing now but patches 7 and 12 did not apply with git am.
> Both failed around lines 1095/1096.
> I can apply them manually but I may be using the wrong branch (tty-next).
> Which branch/commit did you create your patches from? I don't see it in the
> patch submission.

I figured it out. git am was applying the typo fix patch out of order.
Sorry, I didn't notice that. Patches should be fine.

I can do a final test once you decide what to do with the BIT() conversion patch.

Parker