Re: [PATCH] of: spi: Export single device registration method and accessors (v2)

[Mark Brown <broonie-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1704 bytes --]

On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 01:48:06PM +0200, Pantelis Antoniou wrote:
> > On Oct 29, 2014, at 12:14 , Mark Brown <broonie-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org> wrote:

> > This feels like there is an abstraction problem somewhere, whatever code
> > is supposed to use this is going to need to be taught about each
> > individual bus which is going to be tedious, I would expect that we'd
> > have something like the bus being able to provide a callback which will
> > get invoked whenever a new node appears on the parent node for the bus.

> There’s a whole patchset that does exactly this. 
> Look at "OF: spi: Add OF notifier handler” and you’ll where this is used.

I deleted that unread I'm afraid; one of the reasons that you should use
subject lines matching the styles for the subsystems is that it's one of
the things people use to filter out things that actually need attention,
if things are busy things that at first glance don't look terribly
relevant (like changes to the OF core in this case) are likely to get
looked at less urgently or just skipped.

A quick glance suggests that this is adding code inside the SPI core so
it's still not explaining why anything is being exported, can you
clarify please?

> > SubmittingPatches says.  Please also try to keep your CC list sane,
> > CCing random people just means that you're increasing the volume of mail
> > they have to process.  I'm surprised kernel.org accepts so many CCs.

> > I have to say I don't recall ever seeing v1...

> All of them are in the CC list for a reason. 

This is a single, standalone SPI patch - you didn't send it as part of a
series (which is the only reason I read it).

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 473 bytes --]