Re: [PATCH -next] mmc: aspeed: Fix return value check in aspeed_sdc_probe()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, 27 Aug 2019 at 02:47, Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, 27 Aug 2019, Andrew Jeffery wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Mon, 26 Aug 2019, at 22:34, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > > > Fixes: 09eed7fffd33 ("mmc: Add support for the ASPEED SD controller")
> > >                         ^^^^
> > > When we're adding new files, could we use the prefix for the new driver
> > > instead of just the subsystem?  "mmc: aspeed: Add new driver"?
> > > Otherwise it's tricky to know what people want for the driver.
> >
> > I don't have any issue with the request, but I don't understand this last
> > bit. What do you mean by "it's tricky to know what people want for the
> > driver"?
>
> There is no obvious algorithm that tells how to go from a file name to an
> appropriate subject line prefix.

For MMC we normally use the name of the host driver file (excluding
".c") as part of the prefix.

For this case that means I amended the header into: mmc:
sdhci-of-aspeed: Fix return value check in aspeed_sdc_probe() and
applied it for next.

I also took the liberty to change this for the other related patches
for the "aspeed" driver to follow the same pattern.

Kind regards
Uffe



[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Development]     [Kernel Announce]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Linux Networking Development]     [Share Photos]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux