From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jean Delvare Subject: Re: [Patch 1/3] firmware: dmi_scan: rename dmi_table to dmi_decode_table Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2015 10:35:11 +0200 Message-ID: <20150416103511.55927ccc@endymion.delvare> References: <1427979423-22767-1-git-send-email-ivan.khoronzhuk@globallogic.com> <1427979423-22767-2-git-send-email-ivan.khoronzhuk@globallogic.com> <20150415143530.GF4804@codeblueprint.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20150415143530.GF4804-mF/unelCI9GS6iBeEJttW/XRex20P6io@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-api-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Matt Fleming Cc: Ivan Khoronzhuk , linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, matt.fleming-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, ard.biesheuvel-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, grant.likely-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, linux-api-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-doc-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, mikew-hpIqsD4AKlfQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, dmidecode-devel-qX2TKyscuCcdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, leif.lindholm-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, msalter-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, roy.franz-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org Hi Matt, On Wed, 15 Apr 2015 15:35:30 +0100, Matt Fleming wrote: > On Thu, 02 Apr, at 03:57:01PM, Ivan Khoronzhuk wrote: > > The "dmi_table" function looks like data instance, but it does DMI > > table decode. This patch renames it to "dmi_decode_table" name as > > more appropriate. That allows us to use "dmi_table" name for correct > > purposes. > > > > Signed-off-by: Ivan Khoronzhuk > > --- > > drivers/firmware/dmi_scan.c | 10 +++++----- > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > Looks good to me. > > Jean, do you want me to pick this patch up or are you going to? Good question, we need to agree on a strategy. There are 3 patch sets to consider here. 1* My patch fixing the UUID ordering bug. It must go in first and immediately, as it fixes a regression and will have to be backported to stable branches. 2* 2 older patches from Ivan which are currently in your efi-next tree if I'm not mistaken. Both were based on an old tree so they do not apply cleanly on kernel v4.0, I had to fix them up manually. I have no idea if git would be able to merge them properly, as the fix above changed the context even more. 3* The 3 new patches from Ivan which I am reviewing now, which are not applied in any public tree AFAIK. I don't really care who picks these patches up and sends them to Linus, but I think they should all follow the same route so that Linus has as little merge work to do as possible. So either you pick them all, or I do. If I do, you'll have to drop the 2 patches you have in efi-next. Again I'm fine either way, so please let me know what makes your life easier and let's do that. Thanks, -- Jean Delvare SUSE L3 Support