Hello Johan, Greg On Fri, Dec 15, 2023 at 05:18:52PM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote: > On Fri, Dec 15, 2023 at 02:55:59PM +0100, Francesco Dolcini wrote: > > To me the change is correct, with that said probably this should have > > been explicitly mentioned in the commit message or a separate > > preparation patch. > > It's a separate change and should not be hidden away in a tree-wide > change that goes through a different maintainer. > > Please drop this change from this patch and resubmit it separately to me > if you want and I'll review when I have the time. Fine, I agree. I see those options (let me know if you see other options I have not mentioned): 1. I add this change (taking into account also intel ice) as a separate patch in this series and you may just ack it and Greg could merge together with the serdev one. 2. I prepare an independent patch for the GNSS change and only once this is merged I'll send a rebased v2 of this one. 3. I update this patch without this GNSS API change, that mean I will have to cast away the signed type from a few GNSS drivers. 1 is my preferred option, 2 is fine, but it seems a little bit of overdoing, 3 I would avoid, we are doing this cleanup to be a little bit more strongly typed and to prevent the kind of bugs that is the original trigger for this patch. What would you Greg and Johan prefer? > And when doing tree-wide changes, please try to follow the style of the > driver you are changing (e.g. do not introduce inconsistencies by > changing to open parenthesis alignment of continuation lines in code > that do not use it). ack, sorry about that, looking back at the archive is seems a recent pain point, also Jiri fell in this trap. Francesco
