From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6907922D4C7; Fri, 16 May 2025 08:52:21 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1747385542; cv=none; b=aqIMJAh0pTpn/8Sfcb/jRMUAVQnBY8M9dBrO31W8OJWuabtKsqmn1eA8PDpwJeGKf8tSAVaHHPfCcft7Wb1lzDvSZCt8b1CM3KDv6Tal1ten/Jnn77SczDEyd7gpIuoDS9R/x5OR5mZSog8EW0TOVoiJMx4QWnAXPA1ds+OiDTw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1747385542; c=relaxed/simple; bh=0kC6rQVUs9z3NtsA1Czl/GjAKkE3YW7Ze66a6nN1qP0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=hlpzrKhsGZZuQTF5QjXuo32r8PuW3xuR04RTZQgZqHlhbKGeM6URYy6rP4a498oHueVRpJc/1FaRmrGB7wBNCVCuQU8JEnY7LC3saFQdMzt9Tp/RtkAXXt6vWEur44ggW1IviE7QNZ0ykuGhN1/G6Fuemj4+VVq3WQ+JleAO/Vc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=pOrz695A; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="pOrz695A" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E006BC4CEE4; Fri, 16 May 2025 08:52:19 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1747385541; bh=0kC6rQVUs9z3NtsA1Czl/GjAKkE3YW7Ze66a6nN1qP0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=pOrz695AsvEBq7UVAQQYINiMfAUnQec5uzOPYgu50wck9xNrT8C0m+UT8zFA9kqMg uqgB3leMCYAgvneT5kIyf6ezGjU6R9O8oVI6IndJ5EK3x2XNQALZLOnr2SLK3yqSlr jCqYgzMfOiMvvZstdaq+ABSosSxsXLt1atPrTmCCO6qk4QOdfGQ54vErvcDuFabHRY 6Gk3OC59TqzfztzdBQsbQGsKG9JUxHwTYGvBPMca+3xNNr47hI+AiaTUPy9Qwk/QGB MT/qYtz0KgqjLW1uzkuBM9vsy5W5t8z95XVFa+vttj2M6uwVFFzOSWJwbC0VA03fK8 dWZjmjMfFYY7g== Date: Fri, 16 May 2025 10:52:17 +0200 From: Niklas Cassel To: Manivannan Sadhasivam Cc: lpieralisi@kernel.org, kw@linux.com, bhelgaas@google.com, jingoohan1@gmail.com, Hans Zhang <18255117159@163.com>, robh@kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v2 0/3] Standardize link status check to return bool Message-ID: References: <20250510160710.392122-1-18255117159@163.com> <174712882946.9059.1080501209546808704.b4-ty@linaro.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <174712882946.9059.1080501209546808704.b4-ty@linaro.org> Hello Mani, On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 10:33:59AM +0100, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote: > > On Sun, 11 May 2025 00:07:07 +0800, Hans Zhang wrote: > > 1. PCI: dwc: Standardize link status check to return bool. > > 2. PCI: mobiveil: Refactor link status check. > > 3. PCI: cadence: Simplify j721e link status check. > > > > Applied, thanks! > > [1/3] PCI: dwc: Standardize link status check to return bool > commit: f46bfb1d3c6a601caad90eb3c11a1e1e17cccb1a > [2/3] PCI: mobiveil: Refactor link status check > commit: 0a9d6a3d0fd1650b9ee00bc8150828e19cadaf23 > [3/3] PCI: cadence: Simplify j721e link status check > commit: 1a176b25f5d6f00c6c44729c006379b9a6dbc703 > This was all applied to the dw-rockchip branch. Was that intentional? My guess is that perhaps you thought that "PCI: dwc: Standardize link status check to return bool" was going to conflict with Hans's other commit: 5e5a3bf48eed ("PCI: dw-rockchip: Use rockchip_pcie_link_up() to check link up instead of open coding") but at least from looking at the diff, they don't seem to touch the same lines, but perhaps you got a conflict anyway? mobiveil and cadence patches seem unrelated to dw-rockchip (unrelated to DWC even). If it was intentional, all is good, but perhaps the branch should have a more generic name, rather than dw-rockchip, especially now when the reset-slot and qcom-reset slot patches are also on the same branch. Kind regards, Niklas