On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 08:13:19PM +0100, Russell King (Oracle) wrote: > On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 09:59:25PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 10:36:29PM +0100, Russell King (Oracle) wrote: > > > On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 11:11:18PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 05:01:48PM +0100, Russell King (Oracle) wrote: > > > > ... > > > > > > > Co-developed by Vladimir Oltean and myself. > > > > > > > > Why not to use > > > > > > > > Co-developed-by: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@xxxxxxx> > > > > > > Ah, that's an official thing. Thanks. > > > > Yep, it's even documented in Submitting Patches. > > > > ... > > > > > > > + phy_node = of_parse_phandle(dn, "phy-handle", 0); > > > > > > > > fwnode in the name, why not to use fwnode APIs? > > > > > > > > fwnode_find_reference(); > > > > > > Marcin has a series converting DSA to use fwnode things - currently DSA > > > does not support ACPI, so converting it to fwnode doesn't make that much > > > sese until the proper ACPI patches get merged, which have now been > > > rebased on this series by Marcin in the expectation that these patches > > > would be merged... so I don't want to tred on Marcin's feet on that. > > > > But it's normal development process... > > > > Anyway, it seems to me that you are using fwnode out of that (with the > > exception of one call). To me it looks that you add a work to him, rather > > than making his life easier, since you know ahead that this is going to be > > converted. > > No, I didn't know ahead of time until Marcin piped up about it, and > then we discussed how to resolve the conflict between the two patch > sets. But now you know that and since your series is not yet in, back to phase 1, i.e. "normal development process (with additional coordination required)". -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
