[lkml]   [2015]   [Apr]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [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 <>
>>> ---
>>> 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.


> 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,

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.

Ivan Khoronzhuk

 \ /
  Last update: 2015-04-16 22:21    [W:0.117 / U:0.516 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site