From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5B55C48BE8 for ; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 14:05:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 32331601FF for ; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 14:05:49 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 32331601FF Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4G4n5m2PQ3z308v for ; Thu, 17 Jun 2021 00:05:48 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=none (no SPF record) smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com (client-ip=192.55.52.151; helo=mga17.intel.com; envelope-from=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com; receiver=) Received: from mga17.intel.com (mga17.intel.com [192.55.52.151]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4G4n5N3v6qz307T for ; Thu, 17 Jun 2021 00:05:27 +1000 (AEST) IronPort-SDR: iCV8lJFW88PyN/QoVN5xjZFRuLtzd/YdGm6TObC+YVFlOMO3AyjY8n9XoKEIbpsjsywm0hPK47 48yGC8ADw/rg== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6200,9189,10016"; a="186558415" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.83,278,1616482800"; d="scan'208";a="186558415" Received: from orsmga004.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.38]) by fmsmga107.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Jun 2021 07:05:16 -0700 IronPort-SDR: dV2AwjTcL1XgrGLea/lTCqvSmWGX79q1zgcOfVt2RnTLz9AGIkyqcnxHK8cmqUz5/bNv8nr2FE Ih/VEAxYqCdQ== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.83,278,1616482800"; d="scan'208";a="554048291" Received: from smile.fi.intel.com (HELO smile) ([10.237.68.40]) by orsmga004-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 16 Jun 2021 07:05:13 -0700 Received: from andy by smile with local (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1ltWAI-002pmh-5s; Wed, 16 Jun 2021 17:05:10 +0300 Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2021 17:05:10 +0300 From: Andy Shevchenko To: "Aneesh Kumar K.V" Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] powerpc/papr_scm: Properly handle UUID types and API Message-ID: References: <20210616134303.58185-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> <6f895afd-3469-c330-a4da-72db89dba6b3@linux.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6f895afd-3469-c330-a4da-72db89dba6b3@linux.ibm.com> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Oliver O'Halloran , Paul Mackerras , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 07:17:03PM +0530, Aneesh Kumar K.V wrote: > On 6/16/21 7:13 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > Parse to and export from UUID own type, before dereferencing. > > This also fixes wrong comment (Little Endian UUID is something else) > > and should eliminate the direct strict types assignments. > > > > Fixes: 43001c52b603 ("powerpc/papr_scm: Use ibm,unit-guid as the iset cookie") > > Fixes: 259a948c4ba1 ("powerpc/pseries/scm: Use a specific endian format for storing uuid from the device tree") > > Do we need the Fixes: there? It didn't change any functionality right? The > format with which we stored cookie1 remains the same with older and newer > code. The newer one is better? Depends if you are okay with Sparse warnings. > Reviewed-by: Aneesh Kumar K.V Thanks for review! -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko