Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] irqchip: stm32: Optimizes and cleans up stm32-exti irq_domain | From | Ludovic BARRE <> | Date | Fri, 20 Apr 2018 09:18:28 +0200 |
| |
ok, So I include your patch in my serie - irqchip: stm32: Optimizes and cleans up stm32-exti irq_domain
BR Ludo
On 04/19/2018 10:03 PM, Radosław Pietrzyk wrote: > Sure, I don't mind. I didn't have time to resend v3 with more verbose > description. > > 2018-04-19 15:24 GMT+02:00 Ludovic BARRE <ludovic.barre@st.com > <mailto:ludovic.barre@st.com>>: > > Hi Radoslaw > > I preparing a patch serie which add support of stm32mp1. > Would you like, I add your patch (with commit message updated) > in my serie? > patch: > -irqchip: stm32: Optimizes and cleans up stm32-exti irq_domain > > BR > Ludo > > > On 03/14/2018 01:04 PM, Marc Zyngier wrote: > > On 14/03/18 11:46, Radosław Pietrzyk wrote: > > Hi Marc, > We had a quite fruitful discussion in this mail thread > regarding this > topic and Ludovic acked it so recently I have asked Thomas > if he still > needs this v3 patch with detailed explanation especially as > v2 version > of stm32-gpio patch has been already taken by Linus. However > if you > require I can resend v3 of this patch only with this > detailed explanation. > > > That'd be useful. The changelog is the only thing that will be > left from > this discussion, so it'd better be complete and accurate. If you > quickly > send a v3 for this single patch, I'll queue it right away. > > Thanks, > > M. > > > 2018-03-14 12:09 GMT+01:00 Marc Zyngier > <marc.zyngier@arm.com <mailto:marc.zyngier@arm.com> > <mailto:marc.zyngier@arm.com <mailto:marc.zyngier@arm.com>>>: > > Radoslaw, > > On 23/02/18 08:42, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > Radoslaw, > > > > On Fri, 23 Feb 2018, Radoslaw Pietrzyk wrote: > > > >> - discards setting handle_simple_irq handler for > hierarchy interrupts > >> - removes acking in chained irq handler as this is > done by > >> irq_chip itself inside handle_edge_irq > >> - removes unneeded irq_domain_ops.xlate callback > > > > if that's all functionally correct, then this is a > nice cleanup. Though > > from the above changelog its hard to tell because it > merily tells WHAT the > > patch does, but not WHY. The WHY is the important > information for a > > reviewer who is not familiar with the particular > piece of code/hardware. > > > > Can you please amend the changelog with proper > explanations why a > > particular piece of code is not needed or has to be > changed to something > > else? > > Any update on this? I'd like to queue this for 4.17, > but Thomas' > comments should be addressed before that happens. Ca > you please respin a > version with a better change log and the various > review tags? > > Thanks, > > M. > -- > Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny... > > > > >
| |