From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jonathan Woithe Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4][RFC v2] fujitsu-laptop: fujitsu-laptop: clean ups from Alan Jenkins Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2017 09:55:34 +1030 Message-ID: <20170203232534.GA12248@marvin.atrad.com.au> References: <20170131130741.GA6218@marvin.atrad.com.au> <20170203134326.GA11947@ozzy.nask.waw.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from server.atrad.com.au ([150.101.241.2]:55524 "EHLO server.atrad.com.au" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752809AbdBCXZo (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Feb 2017 18:25:44 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170203134326.GA11947@ozzy.nask.waw.pl> Sender: platform-driver-x86-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Micha?? K??pie?? Cc: platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org Hi Michael On Fri, Feb 03, 2017 at 02:43:26PM +0100, Micha?? K??pie?? wrote: > > This series of patches for the fujitsu-laptop driver was originally > > submitted by Alan Jenkins in September 2009. For various reasons which are > > entirely my fault they were never acted upon. To remedy this they have been > > ported to the linux-platform-drivers-x86 git tree and compile-tested. > > Consequently this submission is a work in progress and is posted for > > comments and feedback. > > > > The patches are against git://git.infradead.org/linux-platform-drivers-x86.git > > Jonathan, > > I can now see why you were so reluctant to review this series :) > > It is basically unreviewable in the state you posted it in: multiple > changes are packed into a single patch, commit messages are inaccurate > at best and omissive at worst. Yes, patch 1/4 in particular includes a lot of independent changes. Patch 2 is not quite as bad. The last two are fairly self contained. Having said that, the cleanup they collectively implement is a good thing. > In order to salvage Alan's efforts, I will rebase these patches on > dvhart/testing, split them up, write a proper commit message for each of > them and then repost with Alan as the author. That sounds like a good plan. Thanks very much for taking this on. In the meantime I will attempt to find some time to do some runtime testing on my S7020. Admittedly this model uses only a small proportion of the driver's functions, but it is important that they continue to work. > This might take a while though - to give you a rough idea, so far I split > patch 1/4 into eight separate patches (mostly churn, but still). Sure, and no surprises abot the split numbers so far. Regards jonathan