From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from bmailout1.hostsharing.net (bmailout1.hostsharing.net [83.223.95.100]) (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 9D00533D8; Sat, 4 May 2024 14:31:45 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=83.223.95.100 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1714833108; cv=none; b=fIOSrXyCvh+bzsE24U5gFKFs5cktDHYBHMLfOsodDlurRZSEDcaoWzKdyGtYfS+3HQQvtzboZvs3FijgcxmC5pQ5oW87QQt6bR2qe8rN9ga1cKmsECQnVyBkg28Tt/5Abm7D2LwAC7SPF19TeZ0vHL2FZOsKVOapNZPR2Azrzbo= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1714833108; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ocpnnfd8vO1ZXDw0k7uVLJrLdgKTWsFe7g9KPbqBpRQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Ymnk2TiepjKVtDuM+OFkYusALG5F8X0SZN7h4De88iU1XZxpa/fxM4q2xPZRVW+CkE+pUtzYNt0WdL98uXaFsDkffr+yLiRkcuKEn+3BMMv8TFgg1JDzz689S7tLvzdfnkbXVKB9QcCWSeDYnrckRek/htO6L9RiDK0YEBfRAH4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=wunner.de; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=h08.hostsharing.net; arc=none smtp.client-ip=83.223.95.100 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=wunner.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=h08.hostsharing.net Received: from h08.hostsharing.net (h08.hostsharing.net [83.223.95.28]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "*.hostsharing.net", Issuer "RapidSSL TLS RSA CA G1" (verified OK)) by bmailout1.hostsharing.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8667D300102B7; Sat, 4 May 2024 16:31:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: by h08.hostsharing.net (Postfix, from userid 100393) id 672E936599; Sat, 4 May 2024 16:31:42 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sat, 4 May 2024 16:31:42 +0200 From: Lukas Wunner To: Greg Kroah-Hartman , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Michael Ellerman , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Jean Delvare , Guenter Roeck , linux-hwmon@vger.kernel.org, Dennis Dalessandro , linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, Shuai Xue , Will Deacon , Mark Rutland , Jonathan Cameron , Yicong Yang , Jijie Shao , Bjorn Andersson , Konrad Dybcio , Khuong Dinh , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Corentin Chary , "Luke D. Jones" , Henrique de Moraes Holschuh , ibm-acpi-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Azael Avalos , Hans de Goede , Ilpo Jaervinen , platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, Anil Gurumur thy , Sudarsana Kalluru , Tyrel Datwyler , Nilesh Javali , GR-QLogic-Storage-Upstream@marvell.com, Don Brace , storagedev@microchip.com, "James E.J. Bottomley" , "Martin K. Petersen" , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] Deduplicate string exposure in sysfs Message-ID: References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-scsi@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: Dear Greg, On Sat, Apr 20, 2024 at 10:00:00PM +0200, Lukas Wunner wrote: > Introduce a generic ->show() callback to expose a string as a device > attribute in sysfs. Deduplicate various identical callbacks across > the tree. > > Result: Minus 216 LoC, minus 1576 bytes vmlinux size (x86_64 allyesconfig). > > This is a byproduct of my upcoming PCI device authentication v2 patches. > > > Lukas Wunner (6): > driver core: Add device_show_string() helper for sysfs attributes > hwmon: Use device_show_string() helper for sysfs attributes > IB/qib: Use device_show_string() helper for sysfs attributes > perf: Use device_show_string() helper for sysfs attributes > platform/x86: Use device_show_string() helper for sysfs attributes > scsi: Use device_show_string() helper for sysfs attributes This series hasn't been applied to driver-core-next AFAICS and the merge window is drawing closer. So far only patches 1, 2 and 5 have been ack'ed by the respective subsystem maintainers. If the missing acks are the reason it hasn't been applied, would it be possibe to apply only 1, 2 and 5? I would then resubmit the other ones individually to the subsystem maintainers in the next cycle. Thanks! Lukas