From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF78AC433F5 for ; Sat, 5 Feb 2022 18:46:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1380991AbiBESqF (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Feb 2022 13:46:05 -0500 Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:60901 "EHLO mga01.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S239028AbiBESqD (ORCPT ); Sat, 5 Feb 2022 13:46:03 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1644086763; x=1675622763; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=LJyhXHdlSmLbpIh8XLE/wYlidLOXJRLVWt/xTeQrWio=; b=Kbf29i9J0c7K3HZO82x50+Js8sh7S6KzkykT4JyfVvtLi7ZB9TCsWYXI v71+TtAG6Q+kQfxe3MOn1YOeM3RcS7O/Fw51UmB8+JcdGJqx/zccnpO9W STnZYTPnbQunLkWDXk/h5hoPqPf0SKvGvIMCK/yYUOkxir1gAi24Nr13D pxQ1irXBhxMY2PrBp9FOi1IJxVGI4cMBoQBTFE5dBUlwv7i128pJOdruC xmUd8KCuBLJS20p6jsicQGX3Re+S7pYg71wRFjklE9lvB4uRcAArNXu97 st5M/QLgA0wNCpwGvKlH03vjPyq3+Nbfcq2gFObhdMiX3YXUYXtDu/4hr w==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6200,9189,10248"; a="273040915" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.88,346,1635231600"; d="scan'208";a="273040915" Received: from orsmga007.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.58]) by fmsmga101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 05 Feb 2022 10:46:03 -0800 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.88,346,1635231600"; d="scan'208";a="524665214" Received: from smile.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.61]) by orsmga007-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 05 Feb 2022 10:46:01 -0800 Received: from andy by smile.fi.intel.com with local (Exim 4.95) (envelope-from ) id 1nGQ3R-001Ley-My; Sat, 05 Feb 2022 20:45:01 +0200 Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2022 20:45:01 +0200 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Jonathan Cameron Cc: linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Lars-Peter Clausen Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] iio: imu: inv_mpu6050: Drop wrong use of ACPI_PTR() Message-ID: References: <20220203155920.18586-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> <20220205164535.763feeea@jic23-huawei> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20220205164535.763feeea@jic23-huawei> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-iio@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Feb 05, 2022 at 04:45:35PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > On Thu, 3 Feb 2022 17:59:18 +0200 > Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > ACPI_PTR() is more harmful than helpful. For example, in this case > > if CONFIG_ACPI=n, the ID table left unused which is not what we want. > > > > Instead of adding ifdeffery or attribute here and there, drop ACPI_PTR(). > > > > Fixes: 3b3870646642 ("iio: imu: inv_mpu6050: Mark acpi match table as maybe unused") > > Fixes: fd64df16f40e ("iio: imu: inv_mpu6050: Add SPI support for MPU6000") > > Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko > > Hi Andy, > > Whilst I fully support tidying this up, what is 'fixing' as such? > Will get rid of an unused warning for the spi case but that sort > of things doesn't always get fixes tags. True, however I can find a handful examples when this kind of patches were backported. > They tend to result > in backports and I wouldn't think it was worth backporting this > unless I'm missing something... It's not critical, so can you drop the tags when applying, if you think that's okay? -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko