Re: [PATCH v4 6/8] mfd: make mfd_remove_devices() iterate in reverse order

[Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>]

On Mon, 06 Jul 2015, Andy Shevchenko wrote:

> On Mon, 2015-07-06 at 11:24 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 11:10 AM, Andy Shevchenko
> > <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2015-06-24 at 12:31 +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 15 Jun 2015, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > The newly introduced device_for_each_child_reverse() would be 
> > > > > used
> > > > > when MFD
> > > > > core removes the device.
> > > > > 
> > > > > After this patch applied the devices will be removed in a 
> > > > > reversed
> > > > > order. This
> > > > > behaviour is useful when devices have implicit dependency on 
> > > > > order,
> > > > > i.e.
> > > > > consider MFD device with serial bus controller, such as SPI, 
> > > > > and
> > > > > DMA IP that is
> > > > > attached to serial bus controller: before remove the DMA driver 
> > > > > we
> > > > > have to be
> > > > > ensured that no DMA transfers is ongoing and the requested 
> > > > > channel
> > > > > are unused.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <
> > > > > andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
> > > > > ---
> > > > >  drivers/mfd/mfd-core.c | 2 +-
> > > > >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > > 
> > > > Applied, thanks.
> > > 
> > > Hmm… Seems kinda mistake. I can't see this applied (and required
> > > previous patches 4 and 5) to any of your branch neither in 
> > > (today's)
> > > linux-next.
> > 
> > New stuff applied after v4.1 couldn't show up in -next before v4.2
> > -rc1 was
> > released (which just happened last night)?
> 
> Might be, I would like to resend new version of my series and that's
> why I would like to have a branch to check what is already applied. So,
> if I can't see it does it mean it is brewed in the private repository?

If you have patches that depend on this, they either need to come
through my tree, or you have to wait until the next kernel version
(which you probably don't want, right?).

The alternative is that I unapply this patch and the whole lot can be
sucked up by the most appropriate subsystem.

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog