Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 2 Jul 2015 20:34:22 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 00/48] Make the IRQCHIP_DECLARE macro globally accessible | From | Matthias Brugger <> |
| |
2015-07-02 20:23 GMT+02:00 Joël Porquet <joel@porquet.org>: > On Thursday, July 02, 2015 12:33:05 PM Vineet Gupta wrote: >> On Thursday 02 July 2015 04:02 AM, Joel Porquet wrote: >> > At the moment the IRQCHIP_DECLARE macro is only declared locally in >> > 'drivers/irqchip/irqchip.h'. That prevents from using it directly in >> > arch/* >> > directories whenever irqchip drivers only exist there, which happens in a >> > few cases (e.g. arc, arm, microblaze and mips). >> > >> > This patch makes the macro to be globally defined, in >> > include/linux/irqchip.h, and thus usable for arch-specific declarations >> > of irqchip drivers. In this way, it is very similar to what clocksource >> > does (ie CLOCKSOURCE_OF_DECLARE is defined in >> > include/linux/clocksource.h). >> > >> > I split up everything into patches to make the integration easier. Please >> > let me know if it's not, and in such case how to make it better. >> > >> > For now, patch 01 of this series transfers the declaration of the macro >> > IRQCHIP_DECLARE to the global header 'include/linux/irqchip.h'. The >> > following patches, from 02 to 47, modify all the irqchip drivers that use >> > IRQCHIP_DECLARE, one by one. And finally, the last patch 48 removes the >> > private and now useless header 'drivers/irqchip/irqchip.h'. >> >> Hi Joel, >> >> I don't see the rest of series on lkml and/or the patch which touches >> arch/arc. Also, you may wanna redo this after 4.2-rc1 anyways. For ARC >> atleast, there's a new intc which would also require similar fixup. There >> might be others .... >> >> Thx, >> -Vineet > > Hi Vineet (and all), > > Sorry for the mistake, I hope I didn't spam anyone (too much). I realized to > late that sending about fifty patches to 26 recipients was probably not a good > idea, and my smtp provider would have blocked me before the end anyway. > > Therefore I will follow your suggestion and wait until after 4.2-rc1. Then > I'll resubmit a new patchset that takes into account the new intc(s) as well. > > But since this patchset affects many files across several drivers and > architectures, what would be the best way to submit it? > > Would it be OK to send the cover to all the maintainers/mailing-lists involved > in order to inform them that a patchset is affecting their respective > subsystem, but to send the patches only on the kernel mailing-list?
What I have seen recently is, that you send to each maintainer the cover letter and the patch he is concerned about. And put the kernel maling-list(s) in all patches as CC.
Please anyone correct me if I'm wrong.
Regrads, Matthias
-- motzblog.wordpress.com
| |