Hi! > > I'm sorry I failed to meet your high expectations... But I don't > > believe I done anything completely outside of usual kernel procedures. > > I believe code review is quite usual kernel procedure. I don't disagree with that. > > Could you list the patches and objections you have? > > I already expressed my concerns regarding Turris Omnia patch. Ok. > My comments regarding remaining patches: > > - "Make label "white:power" to be consistent with" > > I disagree here. "system" was OK. It was too vague... I know the hardware and it is a LED above power button used as a power indicator. > - "Warn about old defines that probably should not be used." > > Obsolete is only LED_FULL, so the comment is in wrong line No, all of them are bad. Maybe LED_OFF could be used going forward, but... it is simply easier to write 0. The type is not really an en enumeration, it is brightness, with variable maximum value. > - "Group LED functions according to functionality, and add some" > > You're adding here some random comments referencing obsolete > naming. I think that it is enough to say what is current standard. Ok, I'll drop that part. But I really want to get that documented _somewhere_, because obsolete naming is currently in use, and we won't be able to change it :-(. > Also, I had a patch [0] describing standard LED functions in my LED > naming patch set, but it was not merged. It could be worth getting > back to it at this occasion. I'll take a look. Best regards, Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
