On Sat, Mar 08, 2025 at 05:33:05PM +0100, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, Mar 08, 2025 at 10:34:45AM +0100, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> > On 8.03.2025 6:57 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > On Sat, Mar 08, 2025 at 02:10:29AM +0100, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> > >> On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 04:32:50AM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > >>> On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 12:21:36AM +0100, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> > >>>> In order to remove .of_node from the power_supply_config struct,
> > >>>> use .fwnode instead.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Reichel <sebastian.reichel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >>>> ---
> > >>>> drivers/usb/common/usb-conn-gpio.c | 2 +-
> > >>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >>>>
> > >>>> diff --git a/drivers/usb/common/usb-conn-gpio.c b/drivers/usb/common/usb-conn-gpio.c
> > >>>> index aa710b50791b0282be0a6a26cffdd981b794acaa..1e36be2a28fd5ca5e1495b7923e4d3e25d7cedef 100644
> > >>>> --- a/drivers/usb/common/usb-conn-gpio.c
> > >>>> +++ b/drivers/usb/common/usb-conn-gpio.c
> > >>>> @@ -158,7 +158,7 @@ static int usb_conn_psy_register(struct usb_conn_info *info)
> > >>>> struct device *dev = info->dev;
> > >>>> struct power_supply_desc *desc = &info->desc;
> > >>>> struct power_supply_config cfg = {
> > >>>> - .of_node = dev->of_node,
> > >>>> + .fwnode = dev_fwnode(dev),
> > >>>> };
> > >>>>
> > >>>> desc->name = "usb-charger";
> > >>>>
> > >>>> --
> > >>>> 2.47.2
> > >>>
> > >>> Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >>
> > >> Please just merge this patch through the USB tree.
> > >>
> > >> There are no dependencies and I will send a new version for the
> > >> later patches, but they won't make it to 6.15 as I want enough
> > >> time in linux-next for them. This patch is rather simple and
> > >> getting it merged now means we avoid immutable branches or
> > >> merging through the wrong tree in the 6.16 cycle.
> > >
> > > Attempting to merge a single patch out of a series is hard with our
> > > current tools, you know that.
>
> Sorry, I did not know your tooling has issues with that. AFAIK most
> maintainers are using b4 nowadays, which makes it really easy. Might
> be I am biased because I mostly work on ARM stuff where series often
> have patches for the driver and the device tree and thus merging
> partial patch series is basically the norm.
I do use b4, but it wants to suck the whole series down. If I want to
pick an individual one out, I have to manually cut the message-id out
of the email and type out the command and pick the individual commit
out (or use the -P 3 as was said).
But that's a world away from me just hitting a single key in my email
client to suck down the whole thread and apply it to my tree.
For those of us who have to apply a lot of patches, automation is key.
When sending a patch series that wants to be split across multiple
trees, that makes it harder for everyone.
Anyway, I can take this as is, I've spent more time typing this than it
would have taken me to dig out just the single email. Give me a few
days to catch up with it...
thanks,
greg k-h
