From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from e23smtp03.au.ibm.com (e23smtp03.au.ibm.com [202.81.31.145]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3B2BB2C00D5 for ; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 10:47:26 +1100 (EST) Received: from /spool/local by e23smtp03.au.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 09:47:25 +1000 Received: from d23relay05.au.ibm.com (d23relay05.au.ibm.com [9.190.235.152]) by d23dlp02.au.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B65B2BB0052 for ; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 10:47:23 +1100 (EST) Received: from d23av03.au.ibm.com (d23av03.au.ibm.com [9.190.234.97]) by d23relay05.au.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id s1INRcxF62128286 for ; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 10:27:38 +1100 Received: from d23av03.au.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by d23av03.au.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id s1INlMBr030787 for ; Wed, 19 Feb 2014 10:47:22 +1100 Message-ID: <1392767239.25616.11.camel@pasglop> Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] powerpc/pseries: Report in kernel device tree update to drmgr From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Tyrel Datwyler Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 10:47:19 +1100 In-Reply-To: <5303EC9E.7070507@gmail.com> References: <1391212692-16217-1-git-send-email-tyreld@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1391212692-16217-4-git-send-email-tyreld@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1392596560.24061.12.camel@pasglop> <5303EC9E.7070507@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: nfont@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Tyrel Datwyler List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, 2014-02-18 at 15:28 -0800, Tyrel Datwyler wrote: > In this case we get a double update which I clearly neglected to > mention > in the patch. The first patch in this series actually removes an > unnecessary double update from the existing kernel implementation. The > same information is returned by the update-nodes/properties call the > second time around and aside from being a waste of a few cycles is > harmless. Thanks. Can you resend the patches with updated descriptions ? I will try to send them to Linus by end of week. Cheers, Ben.