Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 16 Apr 2015 23:16:59 +0300 | From | "Ivan.khoronzhuk" <> | Subject | Re: [Patch 1/3] firmware: dmi_scan: rename dmi_table to dmi_decode_table |
| |
Hi Jean,
On 16.04.15 11:35, Jean Delvare wrote: > Hi Matt, > > On Wed, 15 Apr 2015 15:35:30 +0100, Matt Fleming wrote: >> On Thu, 02 Apr, at 03:57:01PM, Ivan Khoronzhuk wrote: >>> The "dmi_table" function looks like data instance, but it does DMI >>> table decode. This patch renames it to "dmi_decode_table" name as >>> more appropriate. That allows us to use "dmi_table" name for correct >>> purposes. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Ivan Khoronzhuk <ivan.khoronzhuk@globallogic.com> >>> --- >>> drivers/firmware/dmi_scan.c | 10 +++++----- >>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) >> Looks good to me. >> >> Jean, do you want me to pick this patch up or are you going to? > Good question, we need to agree on a strategy. > > There are 3 patch sets to consider here. > > 1* My patch fixing the UUID ordering bug. It must go in first and > immediately, as it fixes a regression and will have to be backported > to stable branches.
|| V
> > 2* 2 older patches from Ivan which are currently in your efi-next tree > if I'm not mistaken. Both were based on an old tree so they do not > apply cleanly on kernel v4.0, I had to fix them up manually. I have
They are in master tree already.
> no idea if git would be able to merge them properly, as the fix > above changed the context even more.
Current efi-next already merged, so you should base your patches on top of last changes.
> > 3* The 3 new patches from Ivan which I am reviewing now, which are not > applied in any public tree AFAIK.
It shouldn't happen, I've been verifying just now once again. They are applied on top of linux_next cleanly. Equal as on efi/next.
> > I don't really care who picks these patches up and sends them to Linus, > but I think they should all follow the same route so that Linus has as > little merge work to do as possible. So either you pick them all, or I > do. If I do, you'll have to drop the 2 patches you have in efi-next. > Again I'm fine either way, so please let me know what makes your life > easier and let's do that. > > Thanks,
Jean, I'm going to base my series "firmware: dmi_scan: add SBMIOS entry point and DMI tables" on top of linux next unless you have already your tree to pick up changes. Please let me know, if you have one.
-- Regards, Ivan Khoronzhuk
| |