ACPI / battery: reorder headers alphabetically
Quoted 13 lines
(quoted diff) +0
-4-#include <linux/kernel.h> -#include <linux/module.h> -#include <linux/types.h> -#include <linux/jiffies.h>#include <
linux/async.h>
-#include <linux/dmi.h>
#include <linux/delay.h>(quoted diff) +4
-0+#include <linux/dmi.h> +#include <linux/jiffies.h> +#include <linux/kernel.h> +#include <linux/module.h>#include <
linux/slab.h>
#include <linux/suspend.h>
Review
Quoted 2 lines
(quoted diff) +1
-1-#include <asm/unaligned.h> +#include <linux/types.h>
These changes completely break my patch:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10142157/
Can we please postpone this patch until I hear back from Rafael about my series, as my series does some of the things this patch series does (like defining pr_fmt to shorten log prints) and this is a much smaller changeset and would require small changes on conflicts compared to my series?
Thanks.
Ognjen
Quoted 19 lines · Ognjen Galić
Quoted 13 lines
(quoted diff) +0
-4-#include <linux/kernel.h> -#include <linux/module.h> -#include <linux/types.h> -#include <linux/jiffies.h>#include <
linux/async.h>
-#include <linux/dmi.h>
#include <linux/delay.h>(quoted diff) +4
-0+#include <linux/dmi.h> +#include <linux/jiffies.h> +#include <linux/kernel.h> +#include <linux/module.h>#include <
linux/slab.h>
#include <linux/suspend.h>Review
Quoted 2 lines
(quoted diff) +1
-1-#include <asm/unaligned.h> +#include <linux/types.h>These changes completely break my patch:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10142157/
Quoted 5 lines
Can we please postpone this patch until I hear back from Rafael about my series, as my series does some of the things this patch series does (like defining
pr_fmtto shorten log prints) and this is a much smaller changeset and would require small changes on conflicts compared to my series?
Definitely on both series we need to hear from Rafael.
The usual approach, how I understand the process, the first pushed is first served, and a quite normal situation that the one, which had been send later, comes to repository first. But see above, we definitely rely on maintainer's decision here.
P.S. AFAIU both series are rebased on top of linux-pm, correct? (At least I'm sure about this one)
Signature · 2 lines
Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]> Intel Finland Oy
Rafael J. Wysocki
maintainerQuoted 20 lines · Andy Shevchenko
Quoted 19 lines · Ognjen Galić
Quoted 13 lines
(quoted diff) +0
-4-#include <linux/kernel.h> -#include <linux/module.h> -#include <linux/types.h> -#include <linux/jiffies.h>#include <
linux/async.h>
-#include <linux/dmi.h>
#include <linux/delay.h>(quoted diff) +4
-0+#include <linux/dmi.h> +#include <linux/jiffies.h> +#include <linux/kernel.h> +#include <linux/module.h>#include <
linux/slab.h>
#include <linux/suspend.h>Review
Quoted 2 lines
(quoted diff) +1
-1-#include <asm/unaligned.h> +#include <linux/types.h>These changes completely break my patch:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10142157/
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 5 lines
Can we please postpone this patch until I hear back from Rafael about my series, as my series does some of the things this patch series does (like defining
pr_fmtto shorten log prints) and this is a much smaller changeset and would require small changes on conflicts compared to my series?Definitely on both series we need to hear from Rafael.
Right, I still need to convince myself that the Ognjen's series actually works in all cases which I'm not quite sure about ATM.
Quoted 2 lines
The usual approach, how I understand the process, the first pushed is first served,
Right, and the first pushed one need not be the first submitted one, of course.
Quoted 6 lines
and a quite normal situation that the one, which had been send later, comes to repository first. But see above, we definitely rely on maintainer's decision here.
P.S. AFAIU both series are rebased on top of linux-pm, correct? (At least I'm sure about this one)
I prefer stuff based on the Linus' tree, however, as that often makes it more straightforward to handle it for me.
Thanks,
Rafael
Quoted 28 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 26 lines · Andy Shevchenko
Quoted 24 lines · Ognjen Galić
Quoted 13 lines
(quoted diff) +0
-4-#include <linux/kernel.h> -#include <linux/module.h> -#include <linux/types.h> -#include <linux/jiffies.h>#include <
linux/async.h>
-#include <linux/dmi.h>
#include <linux/delay.h>(quoted diff) +4
-0+#include <linux/dmi.h> +#include <linux/jiffies.h> +#include <linux/kernel.h> +#include <linux/module.h>#include <
linux/slab.h>
#include <linux/suspend.h>Review
Quoted 2 lines
(quoted diff) +1
-1-#include <asm/unaligned.h> +#include <linux/types.h>These changes completely break my patch:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10142157/Can we please postpone this patch until I hear back from Rafael about my series, as my series does some of the things this patch series does (like defining
pr_fmtto shorten log prints) and this is a much smaller changeset and would require small changes on conflicts compared to my series?
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 1 line
Definitely on both series we need to hear from Rafael.
Right, I still need to convince myself that the Ognjen's series actually works in all cases which I'm not quite sure about ATM.
What edge cases are you concerned about?
Quoted 12 lines
Quoted 3 lines
The usual approach, how I understand the process, the first pushed is first served,
Right, and the first pushed one need not be the first submitted one, of course.
Quoted 6 lines
and a quite normal situation that the one, which had been send later, comes to repository first. But see above, we definitely rely on maintainer's decision here.
P.S. AFAIU both series are rebased on top of linux-pm, correct? (At least I'm sure about this one)
Incorrect, mine is rebased on Linus's tree.
Quoted 6 lines
I prefer stuff based on the Linus' tree, however, as that often makes it more straightforward to handle it for me.
Thanks,
Rafael
Rafael J. Wysocki
maintainerQuoted 29 lines · Ognjen Galić
Quoted 28 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 26 lines · Andy Shevchenko
Quoted 24 lines · Ognjen Galić
Quoted 13 lines
(quoted diff) +0
-4-#include <linux/kernel.h> -#include <linux/module.h> -#include <linux/types.h> -#include <linux/jiffies.h>#include <
linux/async.h>
-#include <linux/dmi.h>
#include <linux/delay.h>(quoted diff) +4
-0+#include <linux/dmi.h> +#include <linux/jiffies.h> +#include <linux/kernel.h> +#include <linux/module.h>#include <
linux/slab.h>
#include <linux/suspend.h>Review
Quoted 2 lines
(quoted diff) +1
-1-#include <asm/unaligned.h> +#include <linux/types.h>These changes completely break my patch:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10142157/Can we please postpone this patch until I hear back from Rafael about my series, as my series does some of the things this patch series does (like defining
pr_fmtto shorten log prints) and this is a much smaller changeset and would require small changes on conflicts compared to my series?
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 1 line
Definitely on both series we need to hear from Rafael.
Right, I still need to convince myself that the Ognjen's series actually works in all cases which I'm not quite sure about ATM.
What edge cases are you concerned about?
Initialization ordering, basically.
It appears to work only under specific assumptions that are not guaranteed to be satisfied universally, but I need to walk though it again to check that.
Quoted 35 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 34 lines · Ognjen Galić
Quoted 32 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 20 lines · Andy Shevchenko
Quoted 19 lines · Ognjen Galić
Quoted 13 lines
(quoted diff) +0
-4-#include <linux/kernel.h> -#include <linux/module.h> -#include <linux/types.h> -#include <linux/jiffies.h>#include <
linux/async.h>
-#include <linux/dmi.h>
#include <linux/delay.h>(quoted diff) +4
-0+#include <linux/dmi.h> +#include <linux/jiffies.h> +#include <linux/kernel.h> +#include <linux/module.h>#include <
linux/slab.h>
#include <linux/suspend.h>Review
Quoted 2 lines
(quoted diff) +1
-1-#include <asm/unaligned.h> +#include <linux/types.h>These changes completely break my patch:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10142157/Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 5 lines
Can we please postpone this patch until I hear back from Rafael about my series, as my series does some of the things this patch series does (like defining
pr_fmtto shorten log prints) and this is a much smaller changeset and would require small changes on conflicts compared to my series?Definitely on both series we need to hear from Rafael.
Right, I still need to convince myself that the Ognjen's series actually works in all cases which I'm not quite sure about ATM.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 1 line
What edge cases are you concerned about?
Initialization ordering, basically.
It appears to work only under specific assumptions that are not guaranteed to be satisfied universally, but I need to walk though it again to check that.
What are you concerned about? Race conditions in the hooking portions?
Quoted 35 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 34 lines · Ognjen Galić
Quoted 32 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 20 lines · Andy Shevchenko
Quoted 19 lines · Ognjen Galić
Quoted 13 lines
(quoted diff) +0
-4-#include <linux/kernel.h> -#include <linux/module.h> -#include <linux/types.h> -#include <linux/jiffies.h>#include <
linux/async.h>
-#include <linux/dmi.h>
#include <linux/delay.h>(quoted diff) +4
-0+#include <linux/dmi.h> +#include <linux/jiffies.h> +#include <linux/kernel.h> +#include <linux/module.h>#include <
linux/slab.h>
#include <linux/suspend.h>Review
Quoted 2 lines
(quoted diff) +1
-1-#include <asm/unaligned.h> +#include <linux/types.h>These changes completely break my patch:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10142157/Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 5 lines
Can we please postpone this patch until I hear back from Rafael about my series, as my series does some of the things this patch series does (like defining
pr_fmtto shorten log prints) and this is a much smaller changeset and would require small changes on conflicts compared to my series?Definitely on both series we need to hear from Rafael.
Right, I still need to convince myself that the Ognjen's series actually works in all cases which I'm not quite sure about ATM.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 1 line
What edge cases are you concerned about?
Initialization ordering, basically.
It appears to work only under specific assumptions that are not guaranteed to be satisfied universally, but I need to walk though it again to check that.
Well, any updates? It's been a while.
Rafael J. Wysocki
maintainerQuoted 38 lines · Ognjen Galić
Quoted 37 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 35 lines · Ognjen Galić
Quoted 28 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 26 lines · Andy Shevchenko
Quoted 24 lines · Ognjen Galić
Quoted 13 lines
(quoted diff) +0
-4-#include <linux/kernel.h> -#include <linux/module.h> -#include <linux/types.h> -#include <linux/jiffies.h>#include <
linux/async.h>
-#include <linux/dmi.h>
#include <linux/delay.h>(quoted diff) +4
-0+#include <linux/dmi.h> +#include <linux/jiffies.h> +#include <linux/kernel.h> +#include <linux/module.h>#include <
linux/slab.h>
#include <linux/suspend.h>Review
Quoted 2 lines
(quoted diff) +1
-1-#include <asm/unaligned.h> +#include <linux/types.h>These changes completely break my patch:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10142157/Can we please postpone this patch until I hear back from Rafael about my series, as my series does some of the things this patch series does (like defining
pr_fmtto shorten log prints) and this is a much smaller changeset and would require small changes on conflicts compared to my series?Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 1 line
Definitely on both series we need to hear from Rafael.
Right, I still need to convince myself that the Ognjen's series actually works in all cases which I'm not quite sure about ATM.
What edge cases are you concerned about?
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 5 lines
Initialization ordering, basically.
It appears to work only under specific assumptions that are not guaranteed to be satisfied universally, but I need to walk though it again to check that.
Well, any updates? It's been a while.
Right, sorry about that.
I've been traveling lately (actually I'm still on my way home), but I'll do my best to get to your patches as soon as I'm back.