On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 06:39:44PM +0100, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 06:01:46PM +0100, Francesco Dolcini wrote:
> > From: Francesco Dolcini <francesco.dolcini@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > receive_buf() is called from ttyport_receive_buf() that expects values
> > ">= 0" from serdev_controller_receive_buf(), change its return type from
> > ssize_t to size_t.
> >
> > Suggested-by: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/087be419-ec6b-47ad-851a-5e1e3ea5cfcc@xxxxxxxxxx/
> > Signed-off-by: Francesco Dolcini <francesco.dolcini@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > hello,
> > patch is based on current linux next.
> >
> > It has an obvious problem, it touches files from multiple subsystem in a single
> > patch that is complicated to review and eventually merge, just splitting this
> > would however not work, it will break bisectability and the build.
> >
> > I am looking for advise on the best way to move forward.
> >
> > I see the following options:
> > - keep it as it is
> > - break it down with a patch with each subsystem, and squash before applying
> > from a single (tty?) subsystem
> > - go for a multi stage approach, defining a new callback, move to it and in
> > the end remove the original one, likewise it was done for i2c lately
>
> whoops. I just noticed Greg applied commit 475fc6e2de6f ("tty: serdev:
> convert to u8 and size_t") that touch the exact same files without much
> of an issue.
>
> Probably the "keep it as it is" is just the way to go.
Yeah, looks good to me, now queued up, thanks!
greg k-h
_______________________________________________
greybus-dev mailing list -- greybus-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to greybus-dev-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|