On Fri, Dec 15, 2023 at 06:07:33PM +0100, Francesco Dolcini wrote: > 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. Changing the return type of gnss_insert_raw() is going to be a bit more involved and should be done in a separate patch (e.g. you need to look at gnss_usb_rx_complete() and ice_gnss_read() to avoid introducing new warnings there). And both option 2 and 3 will introduce conversion warnings (W=3, which we have plenty of anyway) unless you add casts. I suggest you go with 3, unless you insist on 2. Johan
