On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 06:43:17PM +0800, Xu Yilun wrote: > On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 08:43:07AM +0100, Greg KH wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 02, 2020 at 11:21:04PM -0800, Moritz Fischer wrote: > > > From: Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Now the dfl drivers could be made as independent modules and put in > > > different folders according to their functionalities. In order for > > > scattered dfl device drivers to include dfl bus APIs, move the > > > dfl bus APIs to a new header file in the public folder. > > > > > > [mdf@xxxxxxxxxx: Fixed up header guards to match filename] > > > Signed-off-by: Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@xxxxxxxxx> > > > Reviewed-by: Tom Rix <trix@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > Acked-by: Wu Hao <hao.wu@xxxxxxxxx> > > > Signed-off-by: Moritz Fischer <mdf@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > MAINTAINERS | 1 + > > > drivers/fpga/dfl.c | 1 + > > > drivers/fpga/dfl.h | 72 ------------------------------------- > > > include/linux/dfl.h | 86 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > 4 files changed, 88 insertions(+), 72 deletions(-) > > > create mode 100644 include/linux/dfl.h > > > > Why move this if there is no in-kernel users? > > The DFL emif driver in driver/memory is the first user, see: > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-fpga/20201027105545.GB20676@kozik-lap/T/#m6b72f043ecf266c6305bf43db88cddcaf3f9f73d > > It is not in this patchset, but the memory controller maintainer is already > acked this patch. How am I, or anyone else, supposed to know this? Again, don't include patches that are not actually used, that's a huge red flag to any reviewer and it just makes them grumpy and sad and less-likely to ever want to review code from the submitter again... {sigh} greg k-h
