From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]:40260 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752823AbdBHOyB (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Feb 2017 09:54:01 -0500 From: Kalle Valo To: =?utf-8?Q?Rafa=C5=82_Mi=C5=82ecki?= Cc: Arend Van Spriel , =?utf-8?Q?Rafa=C5=82?= =?utf-8?Q?_Mi=C5=82ecki?= , Franky Lin , Hante Meuleman , Pieter-Paul Giesberts , Franky Lin , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, brcm80211-dev-list.pdl@broadcom.com Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 4/9] brcmfmac: add struct brcmf_pub parameter to the __brcmf_err References: <20170202213321.11591-1-zajec5@gmail.com> <20170202213321.11591-4-zajec5@gmail.com> <2812805e-9108-284f-2165-34624d603364@broadcom.com> <209e8eef55927a76470d44482c6d0090@milecki.pl> Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2017 16:52:54 +0200 In-Reply-To: <209e8eef55927a76470d44482c6d0090@milecki.pl> (=?utf-8?Q?=22R?= =?utf-8?Q?afa=C5=82_Mi=C5=82ecki=22's?= message of "Wed, 08 Feb 2017 11:00:47 +0100") Message-ID: <87tw84loop.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> (sfid-20170208_155518_376718_B365F1AB) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Rafa=C5=82 Mi=C5=82ecki writes: > On 2017-02-08 10:54, Arend Van Spriel wrote: >> On 2-2-2017 22:33, Rafa=C5=82 Mi=C5=82ecki wrote: >>> From: Rafa=C5=82 Mi=C5=82ecki >>> >>> This will allow getting struct device reference from the passed >>> brcmf_pub for the needs of dev_err. More detailed messages are really >>> important for home routers which frequently have 2 (or even 3) >>> wireless >>> cards supported by brcmfmac. >>> >>> Note that all calls are yet to be updated as for now brcmf_err macro >>> always passes NULL. This will be handled in following patch to make >>> this >>> change easier to review. >> >> I prefer brcmf_err() to have struct device reference directly >> instead of >> using brcmf_pub. That would remove the need for patches 5 till 7 as bus >> specific code already has struct device. So I have acked the first >> three >> patches, but would like to revise 8 and 9. >> >> Kalle, >> >> I acked the first three patches. Can those three still go in for 4.11? > > Sounds OK to me. Kalle, I ack Arend's request if it isn't too late. Ok, I'll try. My plan is to get everything ready for linux-next by tomorrow morning (Finland time), let's see how it goes. Related to this, Rafa=C5=82 are you still deleting the patches from patchwo= rk which should be dropped? I think you are as I can't see patches 4-9 anymore. Now that my patchwork setup is much better (compared to how it was over a year ago) I would actually prefer that you don't do that anymore. The problem is that when you delete the patch from patchwork it completely disappears from patchwork and I can't check the patch or discussion anymore. And I'm so accustomed to use patchwork that only seldom I use email to find the patch. So it would be better to leave the patches as is and let me drop them (=3Dchange the state Changes Requested, Rejected or similar), which is trivial with my script. Otherwise I get this unsure feeling of what happened to the patch :) --=20 Kalle Valo