Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [2/3] mwifiex: support sysfs initiated device coredump | From | Arend van Spriel <> | Date | Tue, 13 Mar 2018 20:42:25 +0100 |
| |
On 3/13/2018 2:10 PM, Kalle Valo wrote: > Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com> writes: > >> On 3/12/2018 10:41 AM, Kalle Valo wrote: >>> Arend Van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Since commit 3c47d19ff4dc ("drivers: base: add coredump driver ops") >>>> it is possible to initiate a device coredump from user-space. This >>>> patch adds support for it adding the .coredump() driver callback. >>>> As there is no longer a need to initiate it through debugfs remove >>>> that code. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com> >>> >>> Based on the discussion I assume this is ok to take to w-d-next. If that's not >>> the case, please let me know ASAP. >> >> It is up to the mwifiex maintainers to decide, I guess. The ABI >> documentation need to be revised and change the callback to void >> return type. I am not sure what the best approach is. 1) apply this >> and fix return type later, or 2) fix return type and resubmit this. >> What is your opinion? > > I guess the callback change will go through Greg's tree? Then I suspect > it's easier that you submit the callback change to Greg first and wait > for it to trickle down to wireless-drivers-next (after the next merge > window) and then I can apply the driver patches. Otherwise there might > be a conflict between my and Greg's tree.
That was my assessment, but unfortunately Marcel already applied the btmrvl patch before I could reply. So how do I move from here? Option 1) revert brmrvl and fix callback return type, or 2) apply mwifiex patch and fix callback return type later for both drivers.
Regards, Arend
| |