On Tue, 2021-12-28 at 10:35 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Tue, Dec 28, 2021 at 04:25:25PM +0100, Niklas Schnelle wrote: > > On Mon, 2021-12-27 at 16:33 -0600, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 27, 2021 at 05:43:13PM +0100, Niklas Schnelle wrote: > > > If we keep it in drivers/pci, please update the subject line to make > > > it more specific and match the convention, e.g., > > > > > > PCI: Compile quirk_tigerpoint_bm_sts() only when HAS_IOPORT set > > > > Ah yeah I was going back and forth between matching this within the > > series vs matching the subsystem. I guess going with the subsystem is > > mote important long term. > > Haha, yes, a little ambiguity there. I do think the subsystem is more > important because the identity of the series is mostly lost after it's > applied. Thanks for thinking about it! > > > > BTW, git complains about some whitespace errors in other patches: > > > > > > Applying: char: impi, tpm: depend on HAS_IOPORT > > > .git/rebase-apply/patch:92: trailing whitespace. > > > If you have a TPM security chip from Atmel say Yes and it > > > .git/rebase-apply/patch:93: trailing whitespace. > > > will be accessible from within Linux. To compile this driver > > > warning: 2 lines add whitespace errors. > > > Applying: video: handle HAS_IOPORT dependencies > > > .git/rebase-apply/patch:23: trailing whitespace. > > > > > > warning: 1 line adds whitespace errors. > > > > That is very strange. I did run checkpatch before. There are a few > > warnings not to touch obsolete code unnecessarily and a check about > > using udelay() (pre-existing) plus two missing blank lines in pci- > > quirks.h that I ignored because it matches the sorounding style. > > > > I did notice that lore fails to render the subject lines for some of > > the patches. But I just tried fetching the patches with b4 on top of > > v5.16-rc7 and the resulting tree passes "./scripts/checkpatch.pl --git > > v5.16-rc7..HEAD" and has an empty diff to my branch. What tool did you > > use to check? > > "git am" is what complained. Here's what I did: > > $ git checkout -b wip/niklas v5.16-rc1 Ah this seems to be because my patches are against v5.16-rc7. I noted that in the cover letter but I guess that is easy to miss and might not match expectations. > Switched to a new branch 'wip/niklas' > 10:30:06 ~/linux (wip/niklas)$ b4 am -om/ 20211227164317.4146918-1-schnelle@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > Looking up https://lore.kernel.org/r/20211227164317.4146918-1-schnelle%40linux.ibm.com > Grabbing thread from lore.kernel.org/all/20211227164317.4146918-1-schnelle%40linux.ibm.com/t.mbox.gz > Analyzing 70 messages in the thread > Checking attestation on all messages, may take a moment... > --- > ✓ [PATCH RFC 1/32] Kconfig: introduce and depend on LEGACY_PCI > ✓ [PATCH RFC 2/32] Kconfig: introduce HAS_IOPORT option and select it as necessary > ✓ [PATCH RFC 3/32] ACPI: Kconfig: add HAS_IOPORT dependencies > ✓ [PATCH RFC 4/32] parport: PC style parport depends on HAS_IOPORT > ✓ [PATCH RFC 5/32] char: impi, tpm: depend on HAS_IOPORT > ✓ [PATCH RFC 6/32] speakup: Kconfig: add HAS_IOPORT dependencies > + Reviewed-by: Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > ✓ [PATCH RFC 7/32] Input: gameport: add ISA and HAS_IOPORT dependencies > ✓ [PATCH RFC 8/32] comedi: Kconfig: add HAS_IOPORT dependencies > ✓ [PATCH RFC 9/32] sound: Kconfig: add HAS_IOPORT dependencies > ✓ [PATCH RFC 10/32] i2c: Kconfig: add HAS_IOPORT dependencies > ✓ [PATCH RFC 11/32] Input: Kconfig: add HAS_IOPORT dependencies > ✓ [PATCH RFC 12/32] iio: adc: Kconfig: add HAS_IOPORT dependencies > ✓ [PATCH RFC 13/32] hwmon: Kconfig: add HAS_IOPORT dependencies > ✓ [PATCH RFC 14/32] leds: Kconfig: add HAS_IOPORT dependencies > ✓ [PATCH RFC 15/32] media: Kconfig: add HAS_IOPORT dependencies > ✓ [PATCH RFC 16/32] misc: handle HAS_IOPORT dependencies > ✓ [PATCH RFC 17/32] net: Kconfig: add HAS_IOPORT dependencies > + Acked-by: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > ✓ [PATCH RFC 18/32] pcmcia: Kconfig: add HAS_IOPORT dependencies > + Acked-by: Dominik Brodowski <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > ✓ [PATCH RFC 19/32] platform: Kconfig: add HAS_IOPORT dependencies > ✓ [PATCH RFC 20/32] pnp: Kconfig: add HAS_IOPORT dependencies > ✓ [PATCH RFC 21/32] power: Kconfig: add HAS_IOPORT dependencies > ✓ [PATCH RFC 22/32] video: handle HAS_IOPORT dependencies > ✓ [PATCH RFC 23/32] rtc: Kconfig: add HAS_IOPORT dependencies > ✓ [PATCH RFC 24/32] scsi: Kconfig: add HAS_IOPORT dependencies > ✓ [PATCH RFC 25/32] watchdog: Kconfig: add HAS_IOPORT dependencies > ✓ [PATCH RFC 26/32] drm: handle HAS_IOPORT dependencies > ✓ [PATCH RFC 27/32] PCI/sysfs: make I/O resource depend on HAS_IOPORT > ✓ [PATCH RFC 28/32] PCI: make quirk using inw() depend on HAS_IOPORT > ✓ [PATCH RFC 29/32] firmware: dmi-sysfs: handle HAS_IOPORT dependencies > ✓ [PATCH RFC 30/32] /dev/port: don't compile file operations without CONFIG_DEVPORT > ✓ [PATCH RFC 31/32] usb: handle HAS_IOPORT dependencies > ✓ [PATCH RFC 32/32] asm-generic/io.h: drop inb() etc for HAS_IOPORT=n > --- > ✓ Signed: DKIM/ibm.com (From: schnelle@xxxxxxxxxxxxx) > Interesting now I have to figure out why I do get bad DKIM signature checks with b4 and my mails. Maybe b4 has an endianess bug as I'm usually working on mainframe.
