On 14/03/2019 14:24, Stefan Roese wrote: > On 14.03.19 14:14, Matthias Brugger wrote: >> >> >> On 14/03/2019 12:37, Armando Miraglia wrote: >>> Absolutely! >> >> Please don't top post :) >> >>> >>> Cheers, >>> A. >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 14, 2019 at 12:36 PM Stefan Roese <sr@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> [...] >>>> >>>> Would it be possible for you to wait a bit with this minor cleanup? >>>> As I'm preparing a patch to move this driver out of staging right >>>> now. You can definitely follow-up with your cleanup, once this move >>>> is done. Otherwise the move might be delayed even more. >>>> >> >> Hm but shouldn't style issues be a criteria for not accepting a move out of >> staging? > > I would agree, if those style issues where non trivial. In the end we > are talking about one non-optimal identation now.> Fair enough, anyway I'm not the person to decide on that :) Regards, Matthias >> I think so. You could add Armandos patch in your series or rebase your >> series against Greg's tree, once he took the clean-up. Normally Greg is >> incredibly fast :) > > I should have included the history here to make this more clean. I've > started pulling this driver out of staging a few weeks ago: > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10790537/ > ... > > Here you find Greg's comment, that the style patches should be merged > first before the move out of staging. This is what I worked on after > this first patch series: > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/10792455/ > ... > > Now these 9 style issue patches from me have been merged and I would > like to proceed with the driver move. > > Thanks, > Stefan _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
