On Sun, Feb 27, 2022 at 12:39 PM Jonathan Cameron <jic23@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, 21 Feb 2022 20:37:57 +0100 > "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Rafael, > > CC: linux-pm > > Oops. Stupid omission on my part, sorry about that! > > > > > On 2/20/2022 7:15 PM, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > > > From: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > As more drivers start to use namespaces, we need to have varients of these > > > useful macros that allow the export to be in a particular namespace. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > Cc: Paul Cercueil <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > I'd rather route this through linux-pm unless you have dependent changes. > > Ok. > > The kxsd9 patch (4) is dependent on other changes queued for > the merge window in IIO. If we want to do it through linux-pm I'd > love it if we can manage to get the ground work in for the coming merge window. > > So options are: > > 1) This patch alone via linux-pm and I queue the users up for next cycle > Fine by me but always awkward to have infrastructure with no users. > 2) First 3 patches via linux-pm so we have a user (scd30) in a low churn > driver and I'll queue the rest for 5.19. Fine by me as well. > That goes on cleanly on 5.17-rc1 and there is nothing else in my review > queue touching that driver. That would work for me. > I'm also interested to hear your view on the discussion going on in reply > to the cover letter. Specifically Paul suggested we 'only' have the > namespaced versions of these macros. Well, I'm a bit afraid that providing the namespaced versions only would slow down the adoption.
