| Message ID | 20240326-module-owner-amba-v1-0-4517b091385b@linaro.org |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | amba: store owner from modules with amba_driver_register() | expand |
Hi Krzysztof On 26/03/2024 20:23, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > Merging > ======= > All further patches depend on the first amba patch, therefore please ack > and this should go via one tree. Are you able to provide a stable branch with these patches once you pull them in to "one tree" here ? We have changes coming up in the coresight tree, which would conflict with the changes here (horribly). FWIW, For patches 1 to 13 : Acked-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com> Suzuki
On 27/03/2024 00:24, Suzuki K Poulose wrote: > Hi Krzysztof > > On 26/03/2024 20:23, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> Merging >> ======= >> All further patches depend on the first amba patch, therefore please ack >> and this should go via one tree. > > Are you able to provide a stable branch with these patches once you pull I doubt I will be merging this. I think amba code goes through Russell. > them in to "one tree" here ? We have changes coming up in the coresight > tree, which would conflict with the changes here (horribly). > You mean conflict with coresight conversion to platform driver? Worst case it is solveable: just drop .owner. Best regards, Krzysztof
On 27/03/2024 05:57, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 27/03/2024 00:24, Suzuki K Poulose wrote: >> Hi Krzysztof >> >> On 26/03/2024 20:23, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>> Merging >>> ======= >>> All further patches depend on the first amba patch, therefore please ack >>> and this should go via one tree. >> >> Are you able to provide a stable branch with these patches once you pull > > I doubt I will be merging this. I think amba code goes through Russell. > >> them in to "one tree" here ? We have changes coming up in the coresight >> tree, which would conflict with the changes here (horribly). >> > > You mean conflict with coresight conversion to platform driver? Worst Yes. > case it is solveable: just drop .owner. Or, we could merge the CoreSight changes (as they are really not affected by the problem this series is trying to address) after the base changes land in AMBA, via the CoreSight tree. Suzuki > > Best regards, > Krzysztof >
Hi Krzysztof, ... > /** > - * amba_driver_register - register an AMBA device driver > + * __amba_driver_register - register an AMBA device driver > * @drv: amba device driver structure > + * @owner: owning module/driver > * > * Register an AMBA device driver with the Linux device model > * core. If devices pre-exist, the drivers probe function will > * be called. > */ > -int amba_driver_register(struct amba_driver *drv) > +int __amba_driver_register(struct amba_driver *drv, ... > +/* > + * use a macro to avoid include chaining to get THIS_MODULE > + */ Should the documentation be moved here? Well... I don't see any documentation linking this file yet, but in case it comes we want documented amba_driver_register() rather than __amba_driver_register(). Andi > +#define amba_driver_register(drv) \ > + __amba_driver_register(drv, THIS_MODULE) > +
On 27/03/2024 21:33, Andi Shyti wrote: > Hi Krzysztof, > > ... > >> /** >> - * amba_driver_register - register an AMBA device driver >> + * __amba_driver_register - register an AMBA device driver >> * @drv: amba device driver structure >> + * @owner: owning module/driver >> * >> * Register an AMBA device driver with the Linux device model >> * core. If devices pre-exist, the drivers probe function will >> * be called. >> */ >> -int amba_driver_register(struct amba_driver *drv) >> +int __amba_driver_register(struct amba_driver *drv, > > ... > >> +/* >> + * use a macro to avoid include chaining to get THIS_MODULE >> + */ > > Should the documentation be moved here? Well... I don't see any > documentation linking this file yet, but in case it comes we want > documented amba_driver_register() rather than > __amba_driver_register(). > That's just a wrapper, not API... why would we care to have kerneldoc for it? Best regards, Krzysztof
Hi Krzysztof, > >> /** > >> - * amba_driver_register - register an AMBA device driver > >> + * __amba_driver_register - register an AMBA device driver > >> * @drv: amba device driver structure > >> + * @owner: owning module/driver > >> * > >> * Register an AMBA device driver with the Linux device model > >> * core. If devices pre-exist, the drivers probe function will > >> * be called. > >> */ > >> -int amba_driver_register(struct amba_driver *drv) > >> +int __amba_driver_register(struct amba_driver *drv, > > > > ... > > > >> +/* > >> + * use a macro to avoid include chaining to get THIS_MODULE > >> + */ > > > > Should the documentation be moved here? Well... I don't see any > > documentation linking this file yet, but in case it comes we want > > documented amba_driver_register() rather than > > __amba_driver_register(). > > > > That's just a wrapper, not API... why would we care to have kerneldoc > for it? Because everyone should use the wrapper while the real function will be used only once or twice. I see also that this is a common practice which I don't surely like. In any case there is no documentation exported for AMBA so that this discussion does not bring any tangible benefit. So that, considering that it's a good improvement, Reviewed-by: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@kernel.org> Andi
On 26/03/2024 21:23, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > Merging > ======= > All further patches depend on the first amba patch, therefore please ack > and this should go via one tree. > > Description > =========== > Modules registering driver with amba_driver_register() often forget to > set .owner field. > > Solve the problem by moving this task away from the drivers to the core > amba bus code, just like we did for platform_driver in commit > 9447057eaff8 ("platform_device: use a macro instead of > platform_driver_register"). > > Best regards, I tried to submit this series to Russell patch tracker and failed. This is ridiculous. It's 2024 and instead of normal process, like every other maintainer, so b4 or Patchwork, we have some unusable system rejecting standard patches. First, it depends some weird, duplicated signed-off-by's. Second it submitting patch-by-patch, all with clicking on some web (!!!) interface. I did it, clicked 19 times and system was happy... but then on email said the patches were rejected. Couldn't tell it after submitting first patch via the web? That's the response: ------------- Your patch has not been logged because: Error: Please supply a summary subject line briefly describing your patch. Error: Please supply a "KernelVersion: " tag after "PATCH FOLLOWS" or "---". Error: the patch you are submitting has one or more missing or incorrect Signed-off-by lines: - author signoff <krzkreg@gmail.com> is missing. Please see the file Documentation/SubmittingPatches, section 11 for details on signing off patches. Please see https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/info.shtml for more information. ------------- This is unbelievable waste of time. I am not going to use this tracker. It's huge obstacle and huge waste of submitters time. Best regards, Krzysztof
On 27/03/2024 10:22, Suzuki K Poulose wrote: > On 27/03/2024 05:57, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 27/03/2024 00:24, Suzuki K Poulose wrote: >>> Hi Krzysztof >>> >>> On 26/03/2024 20:23, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>> Merging >>>> ======= >>>> All further patches depend on the first amba patch, therefore please ack >>>> and this should go via one tree. >>> >>> Are you able to provide a stable branch with these patches once you pull >> >> I doubt I will be merging this. I think amba code goes through Russell. >> >>> them in to "one tree" here ? We have changes coming up in the coresight >>> tree, which would conflict with the changes here (horribly). >>> >> >> You mean conflict with coresight conversion to platform driver? Worst > > Yes. > >> case it is solveable: just drop .owner. > > Or, we could merge the CoreSight changes (as they are really not > affected by the problem this series is trying to address) after the > base changes land in AMBA, via the CoreSight tree. I'll provide you a stable branch to fetch. I was defeated by Russell's patch tracking system. Best regards, Krzysztof X-sender: <linux-kernel+bounces-125722-steffen.klassert=secunet.com@vger.kernel.org> X-Receiver: <steffen.klassert@secunet.com> ORCPT=rfc822;steffen.klassert@secunet.com X-CreatedBy: MSExchange15 X-HeloDomain: mbx-essen-01.secunet.de X-ExtendedProps: BQBjAAoAh4ymlidQ3AgFADcAAgAADwA8AAAATWljcm9zb2Z0LkV4Y2hhbmdlLlRyYW5zcG9ydC5NYWlsUmVjaXBpZW50Lk9yZ2FuaXphdGlvblNjb3BlEQAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADwA/AAAATWljcm9zb2Z0LkV4Y2hhbmdlLlRyYW5zcG9ydC5EaXJlY3RvcnlEYXRhLk1haWxEZWxpdmVyeVByaW9yaXR5DwADAAAATG93 X-Source: SMTP:Default MBX-ESSEN-02 X-SourceIPAddress: 10.53.40.197 X-EndOfInjectedXHeaders: 14356 Received: from mbx-essen-01.secunet.de (10.53.40.197) by mbx-essen-02.secunet.de (10.53.40.198) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2507.37; Sat, 30 Mar 2024 13:19:38 +0100 Received: from b.mx.secunet.com (62.96.220.37) by cas-essen-01.secunet.de (10.53.40.201) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2507.35 via Frontend Transport; Sat, 30 Mar 2024 13:19:38 +0100 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by b.mx.secunet.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B23AF20322 for <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>; Sat, 30 Mar 2024 13:19:38 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: by secunet X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.751 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.751 tagged_above=-999 required=2.1 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: a.mx.secunet.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linaro.org Received: from b.mx.secunet.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (a.mx.secunet.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1O3XCRA_zcxq for <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>; Sat, 30 Mar 2024 13:19:38 +0100 (CET) Received-SPF: Pass (sender SPF authorized) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=147.75.199.223; helo=ny.mirrors.kernel.org; envelope-from=linux-kernel+bounces-125722-steffen.klassert=secunet.com@vger.kernel.org; receiver=steffen.klassert@secunet.com DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 b.mx.secunet.com 116D82025D Authentication-Results: b.mx.secunet.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linaro.org header.i=@linaro.org header.b="bTDp6mzS" Received: from ny.mirrors.kernel.org (ny.mirrors.kernel.org [147.75.199.223]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by b.mx.secunet.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 116D82025D for <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>; Sat, 30 Mar 2024 13:19:38 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp.subspace.kernel.org (wormhole.subspace.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ny.mirrors.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D1F5C1C21191 for <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>; Sat, 30 Mar 2024 12:19:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3604138FA0; Sat, 30 Mar 2024 12:19:14 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linaro.org header.i=@linaro.org header.b="bTDp6mzS" Received: from mail-wr1-f42.google.com (mail-wr1-f42.google.com [209.85.221.42]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CAFA2BB14 for <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>; Sat, 30 Mar 2024 12:19:09 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.221.42 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1711801151; cv=none; b=ixWxAGCKInnwN9unufhlFm4eAhpYUIq+/6LEl1krKKFhGpqzIW5e+Y9A3K0uVDPfwZRETY/bp/yIu8C4oSkudbcxI9GyR73I1UGo4plKoJMQbj+1vTT9AsLo1kCO6VLsJHW4NCEw/RaL21NQSxLjgXQetxtfysU8jtSss5eZpOA= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1711801151; c=relaxed/simple; bh=gnEUiTCGAKgaizTXQISk0bLTxTnE9U1qA4LHHyfKv8g=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=kHVv3D3H5HIwGFTnVbXfF40naFVBZJQDZSYEDmA16BRv+z5Wr4eaM0kfcQw2lPi96USyLJ8eO1hOcJgGs71zEqUUv0iViM3O5enW6crZGDfvgHUZNMrTYcwlrQaRJeaLjcaOWe5EnTC4c0kracol+FUJ9RGnTHYKqhbhPUKkXzs= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linaro.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linaro.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linaro.org header.i=@linaro.org header.b=bTDp6mzS; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.221.42 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linaro.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linaro.org Received: by mail-wr1-f42.google.com with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-33ddd1624beso1664582f8f.1 for <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>; Sat, 30 Mar 2024 05:19:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; t=1711801148; x=1712405948; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:autocrypt:from :content-language:references:cc:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version :date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=pwRsl4tW7J5i09nNsaEN0WbRHBKT2ZFbRiuCSTzWq2c=; b=bTDp6mzSAuWx4lL5cooxcDpZ9W1mea8O0kdKPspePGuynZIKtNZ/QodKPUZUYN6Sxn bqgHPtu7au3ng4zlAbkXPtudj/aOo+e/SYgeh3gbkQs3UFieCRn6QafMakiJalsq+lK3 hRdc3OS2wTijyLDh8yYEofGgKTNGupdxOeqdDR9HQGdzBeiJpnXWjIZ/5X/bPmICFzv6 Q7CGGrTCphDqmfQ7M/Vv0ypdsFDyCkarg5/LBvAAefhoqAV1HezQHE9XBLoiN1+Ekq9f QadJbIRoslyjrl6gukO+WRurbyLtrkeopHU0OJvO2+HQbPl8W+KV2yiYvjnied+VaIHN I0vA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1711801148; x=1712405948; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:autocrypt:from :content-language:references:cc:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version :date:message-id:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=pwRsl4tW7J5i09nNsaEN0WbRHBKT2ZFbRiuCSTzWq2c=; b=Uyrhl0iS+HHVPcHD9JlplLUc3LKvZC+9zSGrS2p4ngVUqA6Loz5ajRMtwiNehHz8ce 7ZWBmNfUzCuFmBy1kU8kDWGP2aTESYuKYABKEI1oUkOKzhtQJfLz7u2czRFbTK/5KxCT X0x4hsD7Xbxk4oj6Lb+MYe4iq+Ybpt9ja83fE4NRPcMWBltsCZ/RQqbWpPlry1/K+YsV WSChQjhDeFn3PozhiA4eVndXL3m5YAy/R9mJqfnGg7ztADohvFX02HnZbGAm5bZubyhg IKaaInkPEzpN+ptYDCcu/nzP6K+caGfu3zhYn/Jtc5zC9qnAz+3pvhkSPaPrss1uFl7/ 2ybw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxZ4OKcnV48ikILJpVo5WNPXxvrQrDAoY76tNm4EwGlI8iPL9Bi 8IxHqIZkR/GrquTBwdosOuZ+cANUxsESnEUWp8mQ1Ss2/sTp/7VUYlbF+HKGiLQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGxitXr7L7h8CUcKtleeDnrSZmBoUk9QkYBw9ltjVABur0LBmd4a6MEByPy5E4LS7vzmYpyOA== X-Received: by 2002:adf:f403:0:b0:343:39a6:93bc with SMTP id g3-20020adff403000000b0034339a693bcmr3335018wro.11.1711801147697; Sat, 30 Mar 2024 05:19:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.20] ([178.197.223.16]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v17-20020adfe291000000b0034174566ec4sm6339522wri.16.2024.03.30.05.19.05 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 30 Mar 2024 05:19:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <edd167fb-df0c-4434-8f9f-7c4016b87d83@linaro.org> Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2024 13:19:05 +0100 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org> List-Subscribe: <mailto:linux-kernel+subscribe@vger.kernel.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:linux-kernel+unsubscribe@vger.kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/19] amba: store owner from modules with amba_driver_register() To: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>, Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>, Mike Leach <mike.leach@linaro.org>, James Clark <james.clark@arm.com>, Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>, Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com>, Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@foss.st.com>, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>, Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@kernel.org>, Olivia Mackall <olivia@selenic.com>, Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>, Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>, Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>, Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>, Michal Simek <michal.simek@amd.com>, Eric Auger <eric.auger@redhat.com>, Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, coresight@lists.linaro.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org, dmaengine@vger.kernel.org, linux-input@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org References: <20240326-module-owner-amba-v1-0-4517b091385b@linaro.org> <3f61d6d3-a0d6-4c49-b094-6ba62d09ab14@arm.com> <f23f2e60-e5c0-4c3c-9722-dba63a6e7ef6@linaro.org> <d8fa8e1a-b2ce-4d91-9ab5-ad1b160111c6@arm.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org> Autocrypt: addr=krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org; keydata= xsFNBFVDQq4BEAC6KeLOfFsAvFMBsrCrJ2bCalhPv5+KQF2PS2+iwZI8BpRZoV+Bd5kWvN79 cFgcqTTuNHjAvxtUG8pQgGTHAObYs6xeYJtjUH0ZX6ndJ33FJYf5V3yXqqjcZ30FgHzJCFUu JMp7PSyMPzpUXfU12yfcRYVEMQrmplNZssmYhiTeVicuOOypWugZKVLGNm0IweVCaZ/DJDIH gNbpvVwjcKYrx85m9cBVEBUGaQP6AT7qlVCkrf50v8bofSIyVa2xmubbAwwFA1oxoOusjPIE J3iadrwpFvsZjF5uHAKS+7wHLoW9hVzOnLbX6ajk5Hf8Pb1m+VH/E8bPBNNYKkfTtypTDUCj NYcd27tjnXfG+SDs/EXNUAIRefCyvaRG7oRYF3Ec+2RgQDRnmmjCjoQNbFrJvJkFHlPeHaeS BosGY+XWKydnmsfY7SSnjAzLUGAFhLd/XDVpb1Een2XucPpKvt9ORF+48gy12FA5GduRLhQU vK4tU7ojoem/G23PcowM1CwPurC8sAVsQb9KmwTGh7rVz3ks3w/zfGBy3+WmLg++C2Wct6nM Pd8/6CBVjEWqD06/RjI2AnjIq5fSEH/BIfXXfC68nMp9BZoy3So4ZsbOlBmtAPvMYX6U8VwD TNeBxJu5Ex0Izf1NV9CzC3nNaFUYOY8KfN01X5SExAoVTr09ewARAQABzTRLcnp5c3p0b2Yg S296bG93c2tpIDxrcnp5c3p0b2Yua296bG93c2tpQGxpbmFyby5vcmc+wsGUBBMBCgA+FiEE m9B+DgxR+NWWd7dUG5NDfTtBYpsFAmI+BxMCGwMFCRRfreEFCwkIBwIGFQoJCAsCBBYCAwEC HgECF4AACgkQG5NDfTtBYptgbhAAjAGunRoOTduBeC7V6GGOQMYIT5n3OuDSzG1oZyM4kyvO XeodvvYv49/ng473E8ZFhXfrre+c1olbr1A8pnz9vKVQs9JGVa6wwr/6ddH7/yvcaCQnHRPK mnXyP2BViBlyDWQ71UC3N12YCoHE2cVmfrn4JeyK/gHCvcW3hUW4i5rMd5M5WZAeiJj3rvYh v8WMKDJOtZFXxwaYGbvFJNDdvdTHc2x2fGaWwmXMJn2xs1ZyFAeHQvrp49mS6PBQZzcx0XL5 cU9ZjhzOZDn6Apv45/C/lUJvPc3lo/pr5cmlOvPq1AsP6/xRXsEFX/SdvdxJ8w9KtGaxdJuf rpzLQ8Ht+H0lY2On1duYhmro8WglOypHy+TusYrDEry2qDNlc/bApQKtd9uqyDZ+rx8bGxyY qBP6bvsQx5YACI4p8R0J43tSqWwJTP/R5oPRQW2O1Ye1DEcdeyzZfifrQz58aoZrVQq+innR aDwu8qDB5UgmMQ7cjDSeAQABdghq7pqrA4P8lkA7qTG+aw8Z21OoAyZdUNm8NWJoQy8m4nUP gmeeQPRc0vjp5JkYPgTqwf08cluqO6vQuYL2YmwVBIbO7cE7LNGkPDA3RYMu+zPY9UUi/ln5 dcKuEStFZ5eqVyqVoZ9eu3RTCGIXAHe1NcfcMT9HT0DPp3+ieTxFx6RjY3kYTGLOwU0EVUNc NAEQAM2StBhJERQvgPcbCzjokShn0cRA4q2SvCOvOXD+0KapXMRFE+/PZeDyfv4dEKuCqeh0 hihSHlaxTzg3TcqUu54w2xYskG8Fq5tg3gm4kh1Gvh1LijIXX99ABA8eHxOGmLPRIBkXHqJY oHtCvPc6sYKNM9xbp6I4yF56xVLmHGJ61KaWKf5KKWYgA9kfHufbja7qR0c6H79LIsiYqf92 H1HNq1WlQpu/fh4/XAAaV1axHFt/dY/2kU05tLMj8GjeQDz1fHas7augL4argt4e+jum3Nwt yupodQBxncKAUbzwKcDrPqUFmfRbJ7ARw8491xQHZDsP82JRj4cOJX32sBg8nO2N5OsFJOcd 5IE9v6qfllkZDAh1Rb1h6DFYq9dcdPAHl4zOj9EHq99/CpyccOh7SrtWDNFFknCmLpowhct9 5ZnlavBrDbOV0W47gO33WkXMFI4il4y1+Bv89979rVYn8aBohEgET41SpyQz7fMkcaZU+ok/ +HYjC/qfDxT7tjKXqBQEscVODaFicsUkjheOD4BfWEcVUqa+XdUEciwG/SgNyxBZepj41oVq FPSVE+Ni2tNrW/e16b8mgXNngHSnbsr6pAIXZH3qFW+4TKPMGZ2rZ6zITrMip+12jgw4mGjy 5y06JZvA02rZT2k9aa7i9dUUFggaanI09jNGbRA/ABEBAAHCwXwEGAEKACYCGwwWIQSb0H4O DFH41ZZ3t1Qbk0N9O0FimwUCYDzvagUJFF+UtgAKCRAbk0N9O0Fim9JzD/0auoGtUu4mgnna oEEpQEOjgT7l9TVuO3Qa/SeH+E0m55y5Fjpp6ZToc481za3xAcxK/BtIX5Wn1mQ6+szfrJQ6 59y2io437BeuWIRjQniSxHz1kgtFECiV30yHRgOoQlzUea7FgsnuWdstgfWi6LxstswEzxLZ Sj1EqpXYZE4uLjh6dW292sO+j4LEqPYr53hyV4I2LPmptPE9Rb9yCTAbSUlzgjiyyjuXhcwM qf3lzsm02y7Ooq+ERVKiJzlvLd9tSe4jRx6Z6LMXhB21fa5DGs/tHAcUF35hSJrvMJzPT/+u /oVmYDFZkbLlqs2XpWaVCo2jv8+iHxZZ9FL7F6AHFzqEFdqGnJQqmEApiRqH6b4jRBOgJ+cY qc+rJggwMQcJL9F+oDm3wX47nr6jIsEB5ZftdybIzpMZ5V9v45lUwmdnMrSzZVgC4jRGXzsU EViBQt2CopXtHtYfPAO5nAkIvKSNp3jmGxZw4aTc5xoAZBLo0OV+Ezo71pg3AYvq0a3/oGRG KQ06ztUMRrj8eVtpImjsWCd0bDWRaaR4vqhCHvAG9iWXZu4qh3ipie2Y0oSJygcZT7H3UZxq fyYKiqEmRuqsvv6dcbblD8ZLkz1EVZL6djImH5zc5x8qpVxlA0A0i23v5QvN00m6G9NFF0Le D2GYIS41Kv4Isx2dEFh+/Q== In-Reply-To: <d8fa8e1a-b2ce-4d91-9ab5-ad1b160111c6@arm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: linux-kernel+bounces-125722-steffen.klassert=secunet.com@vger.kernel.org X-MS-Exchange-Organization-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Mar 2024 12:19:38.7569 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-Organization-Network-Message-Id: 9ded166d-4895-4afd-90c2-08dc50b3ab91 X-MS-Exchange-Organization-OriginalClientIPAddress: 62.96.220.37 X-MS-Exchange-Organization-OriginalServerIPAddress: 10.53.40.201 X-MS-Exchange-Organization-Cross-Premises-Headers-Processed: cas-essen-01.secunet.de X-MS-Exchange-Organization-OrderedPrecisionLatencyInProgress: LSRV=cas-essen-01.secunet.de:TOTAL-FE=0.004|SMR=0.004(SMRPI=0.002(SMRPI-FrontendProxyAgent=0.002));2024-03-30T12:19:38.760Z X-MS-Exchange-Forest-ArrivalHubServer: mbx-essen-02.secunet.de X-MS-Exchange-Organization-AuthSource: cas-essen-01.secunet.de X-MS-Exchange-Organization-AuthAs: Anonymous X-MS-Exchange-Organization-OriginalSize: 13811 X-MS-Exchange-Organization-Transport-Properties: DeliveryPriority=Low X-MS-Exchange-Organization-Prioritization: 2:ShadowRedundancy X-MS-Exchange-Organization-IncludeInSla: False:ShadowRedundancy On 27/03/2024 10:22, Suzuki K Poulose wrote: > On 27/03/2024 05:57, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 27/03/2024 00:24, Suzuki K Poulose wrote: >>> Hi Krzysztof >>> >>> On 26/03/2024 20:23, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>> Merging >>>> ======= >>>> All further patches depend on the first amba patch, therefore please ack >>>> and this should go via one tree. >>> >>> Are you able to provide a stable branch with these patches once you pull >> >> I doubt I will be merging this. I think amba code goes through Russell. >> >>> them in to "one tree" here ? We have changes coming up in the coresight >>> tree, which would conflict with the changes here (horribly). >>> >> >> You mean conflict with coresight conversion to platform driver? Worst > > Yes. > >> case it is solveable: just drop .owner. > > Or, we could merge the CoreSight changes (as they are really not > affected by the problem this series is trying to address) after the > base changes land in AMBA, via the CoreSight tree. I'll provide you a stable branch to fetch. I was defeated by Russell's patch tracking system. Best regards, Krzysztof
On Tue, 26 Mar 2024 21:23:30 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > Merging > ======= > All further patches depend on the first amba patch, therefore please ack > and this should go via one tree. > > Description > =========== > Modules registering driver with amba_driver_register() often forget to > set .owner field. > > [...] Applied, thanks! [01/19] amba: store owner from modules with amba_driver_register() (no commit info) [02/19] coresight: cti: drop owner assignment (no commit info) [03/19] coresight: catu: drop owner assignment (no commit info) [04/19] coresight: etm3x: drop owner assignment (no commit info) [05/19] coresight: etm4x: drop owner assignment (no commit info) [06/19] coresight: funnel: drop owner assignment (no commit info) [07/19] coresight: replicator: drop owner assignment (no commit info) [08/19] coresight: etb10: drop owner assignment (no commit info) [09/19] coresight: stm: drop owner assignment (no commit info) [10/19] coresight: tmc: drop owner assignment (no commit info) [11/19] coresight: tpda: drop owner assignment (no commit info) [12/19] coresight: tpdm: drop owner assignment (no commit info) [13/19] coresight: tpiu: drop owner assignment (no commit info) [14/19] i2c: nomadik: drop owner assignment (no commit info) [15/19] hwrng: nomadik: drop owner assignment (no commit info) [16/19] dmaengine: pl330: drop owner assignment (no commit info) [17/19] Input: ambakmi - drop owner assignment (no commit info) [18/19] memory: pl353-smc: drop owner assignment (no commit info) [19/19] vfio: amba: drop owner assignment (no commit info) Best regards,
On Sat, Mar 30, 2024 at 01:18:30PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 26/03/2024 21:23, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > Merging > > ======= > > All further patches depend on the first amba patch, therefore please ack > > and this should go via one tree. > > > > Description > > =========== > > Modules registering driver with amba_driver_register() often forget to > > set .owner field. > > > > Solve the problem by moving this task away from the drivers to the core > > amba bus code, just like we did for platform_driver in commit > > 9447057eaff8 ("platform_device: use a macro instead of > > platform_driver_register"). > > > > Best regards, > > I tried to submit this series to Russell patch tracker and failed. This > is ridiculous. It's 2024 and instead of normal process, like every other > maintainer, so b4 or Patchwork, we have some unusable system rejecting > standard patches. Sorry but no. Stop being offensive. > First, it depends some weird, duplicated signed-off-by's. Eh? There is no such logic in there. > Second it > submitting patch-by-patch, all with clicking on some web > (!!!) interface. Again, no it doesn't, and you're just throwing crap out because you failed. Unlike most of the "normal" processes, the patch system allows you to submit both by *email* and also by *web* for those cases where the emails get screwed up by ones company mail server. That's why the web interface exists - to give people *flexibility*. The fact is, the web interface is merely a front end interface that generates an email and submits it in the usual way by email - an email that you can perfectly well generate that is *very* close to the standard email that git format-patch generates. The *only* difference is that the patch system wants a KernelVersion: tag in the email _somewhere_ and it doesn't matter where it appears. Git even has support to do this. git format-patch --add-header="KernelVersion: $foo" Why does it want the kernel version? Because when we were running 2.4 and 2.5 kernel versions in parallel, it was important to know which tree the patch was being submitted for. It has continued to be required because it means when there's problems applying a patch, it gives me the additional information about the base used for the patch (and it keeps on being useful to have.) > That's the response: > ------------- > Your patch has not been logged because: > > Error: Please supply a summary subject line briefly describing > your patch. > > > Error: Please supply a "KernelVersion: " tag after "PATCH FOLLOWS" or > "---". > > Error: the patch you are submitting has one or more missing or incorrect > Signed-off-by lines: > > - author signoff <krzkreg@gmail.com> is missing. > > Please see the file Documentation/SubmittingPatches, section 11 > for details on signing off patches. Lots of people use it without a problem. I've just run the parser through its offline tests, and it parses email content correctly. I've no idea what you're doing wrong, but it looks like something pretty serious if it didn't parse the subject line. Rather than getting stressed about it, why don't you send me an email the first time something goes wrong so I can investigate, turn on debugging to capture the problem email?
On Tue, Apr 02, 2024 at 09:56:17AM +0100, Russell King (Oracle) wrote: > On Sat, Mar 30, 2024 at 01:18:30PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > On 26/03/2024 21:23, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > > Merging > > > ======= > > > All further patches depend on the first amba patch, therefore please ack > > > and this should go via one tree. > > > > > > Description > > > =========== > > > Modules registering driver with amba_driver_register() often forget to > > > set .owner field. > > > > > > Solve the problem by moving this task away from the drivers to the core > > > amba bus code, just like we did for platform_driver in commit > > > 9447057eaff8 ("platform_device: use a macro instead of > > > platform_driver_register"). > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > I tried to submit this series to Russell patch tracker and failed. This > > is ridiculous. It's 2024 and instead of normal process, like every other > > maintainer, so b4 or Patchwork, we have some unusable system rejecting > > standard patches. > > Sorry but no. Stop being offensive. > > > First, it depends some weird, duplicated signed-off-by's. > > Eh? There is no such logic in there. > > > Second it > submitting patch-by-patch, all with clicking on some web > > (!!!) interface. > > Again, no it doesn't, and you're just throwing crap out because you > failed. Unlike most of the "normal" processes, the patch system allows > you to submit both by *email* and also by *web* for those cases where > the emails get screwed up by ones company mail server. That's why the > web interface exists - to give people *flexibility*. > > The fact is, the web interface is merely a front end interface that > generates an email and submits it in the usual way by email - an > email that you can perfectly well generate that is *very* close to > the standard email that git format-patch generates. > > The *only* difference is that the patch system wants a KernelVersion: > tag in the email _somewhere_ and it doesn't matter where it appears. > Git even has support to do this. > > git format-patch --add-header="KernelVersion: $foo" > > Why does it want the kernel version? Because when we were running 2.4 > and 2.5 kernel versions in parallel, it was important to know which > tree the patch was being submitted for. It has continued to be required > because it means when there's problems applying a patch, it gives me > the additional information about the base used for the patch (and it > keeps on being useful to have.) > > > That's the response: > > ------------- > > Your patch has not been logged because: > > > > Error: Please supply a summary subject line briefly describing > > your patch. > > > > > > Error: Please supply a "KernelVersion: " tag after "PATCH FOLLOWS" or > > "---". > > > > Error: the patch you are submitting has one or more missing or incorrect > > Signed-off-by lines: > > > > - author signoff <krzkreg@gmail.com> is missing. > > > > Please see the file Documentation/SubmittingPatches, section 11 > > for details on signing off patches. > > Lots of people use it without a problem. I've just run the parser > through its offline tests, and it parses email content correctly. > I've no idea what you're doing wrong, but it looks like something > pretty serious if it didn't parse the subject line. > > Rather than getting stressed about it, why don't you send me an email > the first time something goes wrong so I can investigate, turn on > debugging to capture the problem email? ... and I'll also point out one of the biggest problems is people. People who think it's more complex than it is, or who can't read instructions. For example, trying to tell people to use the standard format subject line: [PATCH ...] blah has proven to be hopeless - unless one states to them the exact sequence of keys on their keyboard to press - yes, it *really* takes that patronising level to get everyone to understand. If one tries to do it any other way, then you get stuff like: "[PATCH ...] ..." with the quotes. Or some other stupid variation. The patch system is as forgiving as possible. It takes standard git formatted patches (with the exception of wanting an additional tag). It is possible that bugs creep in - particularly when Debian updates get applied and change the way Perl works, but I don't think that's what has happened with your situation. I _guess_ you're putting the entire email-like output from git format-patch as the patch file. That won't work - that isn't a "patch file", that is an email/email template, and the patch system will attempt to parse that as the patch itself. I suppose you term "patch" to be the email as well, rather than what I interpret it to be, which is only the output of "diff" - call me old fashioned but that's what a patch file used to be before the waters got muddied by git "patch files".
On 02/04/2024 10:56, Russell King (Oracle) wrote: > On Sat, Mar 30, 2024 at 01:18:30PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 26/03/2024 21:23, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>> Merging >>> ======= >>> All further patches depend on the first amba patch, therefore please ack >>> and this should go via one tree. >>> >>> Description >>> =========== >>> Modules registering driver with amba_driver_register() often forget to >>> set .owner field. >>> >>> Solve the problem by moving this task away from the drivers to the core >>> amba bus code, just like we did for platform_driver in commit >>> 9447057eaff8 ("platform_device: use a macro instead of >>> platform_driver_register"). >>> >>> Best regards, >> >> I tried to submit this series to Russell patch tracker and failed. This >> is ridiculous. It's 2024 and instead of normal process, like every other >> maintainer, so b4 or Patchwork, we have some unusable system rejecting >> standard patches. > > Sorry but no. Stop being offensive. > >> First, it depends some weird, duplicated signed-off-by's. > > Eh? There is no such logic in there. In the web system there is - read the error message I pasted. It wants another SoB from the unrelated email account, the one used purely for registering in some web system, not the one used for code handling. > >> Second it > submitting patch-by-patch, all with clicking on some web >> (!!!) interface. > > Again, no it doesn't, and you're just throwing crap out because you > failed. Unlike most of the "normal" processes, the patch system allows > you to submit both by *email* and also by *web* for those cases where The email one requires additional steps, so this is unnecessary work confusing submitters. I submit dozens or hundreds of patches every release cycle. That's the only subsystem which is odd to use. > the emails get screwed up by ones company mail server. That's why the > web interface exists - to give people *flexibility*. No, they are not. None of my emails are screwed by my company system. > > The fact is, the web interface is merely a front end interface that > generates an email and submits it in the usual way by email - an > email that you can perfectly well generate that is *very* close to > the standard email that git format-patch generates. > > The *only* difference is that the patch system wants a KernelVersion: > tag in the email _somewhere_ and it doesn't matter where it appears. > Git even has support to do this. > > git format-patch --add-header="KernelVersion: $foo" > > Why does it want the kernel version? Because when we were running 2.4 > and 2.5 kernel versions in parallel, it was important to know which > tree the patch was being submitted for. It has continued to be required Which is absolutely ridiculous now. Expecting submitters to adhere to some rule for 20 year old kernel is not reasonable. > because it means when there's problems applying a patch, it gives me > the additional information about the base used for the patch (and it > keeps on being useful to have.) > >> That's the response: >> ------------- >> Your patch has not been logged because: >> >> Error: Please supply a summary subject line briefly describing >> your patch. >> >> >> Error: Please supply a "KernelVersion: " tag after "PATCH FOLLOWS" or >> "---". >> >> Error: the patch you are submitting has one or more missing or incorrect >> Signed-off-by lines: >> >> - author signoff <krzkreg@gmail.com> is missing. ^^^ here you have additional SoB expectation. >> >> Please see the file Documentation/SubmittingPatches, section 11 >> for details on signing off patches. > > Lots of people use it without a problem. I've just run the parser > through its offline tests, and it parses email content correctly. > I've no idea what you're doing wrong, but it looks like something > pretty serious if it didn't parse the subject line. > > Rather than getting stressed about it, why don't you send me an email > the first time something goes wrong so I can investigate, turn on > debugging to capture the problem email? I don't know any person who enjoyed working with your patch workflow.
On 02/04/2024 11:06, Russell King (Oracle) wrote: > On Tue, Apr 02, 2024 at 09:56:17AM +0100, Russell King (Oracle) wrote: >> On Sat, Mar 30, 2024 at 01:18:30PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>> On 26/03/2024 21:23, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>> Merging >>>> ======= >>>> All further patches depend on the first amba patch, therefore please ack >>>> and this should go via one tree. >>>> >>>> Description >>>> =========== >>>> Modules registering driver with amba_driver_register() often forget to >>>> set .owner field. >>>> >>>> Solve the problem by moving this task away from the drivers to the core >>>> amba bus code, just like we did for platform_driver in commit >>>> 9447057eaff8 ("platform_device: use a macro instead of >>>> platform_driver_register"). >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>> >>> I tried to submit this series to Russell patch tracker and failed. This >>> is ridiculous. It's 2024 and instead of normal process, like every other >>> maintainer, so b4 or Patchwork, we have some unusable system rejecting >>> standard patches. >> >> Sorry but no. Stop being offensive. >> >>> First, it depends some weird, duplicated signed-off-by's. >> >> Eh? There is no such logic in there. >> >>> Second it > submitting patch-by-patch, all with clicking on some web >>> (!!!) interface. >> >> Again, no it doesn't, and you're just throwing crap out because you >> failed. Unlike most of the "normal" processes, the patch system allows >> you to submit both by *email* and also by *web* for those cases where >> the emails get screwed up by ones company mail server. That's why the >> web interface exists - to give people *flexibility*. >> >> The fact is, the web interface is merely a front end interface that >> generates an email and submits it in the usual way by email - an >> email that you can perfectly well generate that is *very* close to >> the standard email that git format-patch generates. >> >> The *only* difference is that the patch system wants a KernelVersion: >> tag in the email _somewhere_ and it doesn't matter where it appears. >> Git even has support to do this. >> >> git format-patch --add-header="KernelVersion: $foo" >> >> Why does it want the kernel version? Because when we were running 2.4 >> and 2.5 kernel versions in parallel, it was important to know which >> tree the patch was being submitted for. It has continued to be required >> because it means when there's problems applying a patch, it gives me >> the additional information about the base used for the patch (and it >> keeps on being useful to have.) >> >>> That's the response: >>> ------------- >>> Your patch has not been logged because: >>> >>> Error: Please supply a summary subject line briefly describing >>> your patch. >>> >>> >>> Error: Please supply a "KernelVersion: " tag after "PATCH FOLLOWS" or >>> "---". >>> >>> Error: the patch you are submitting has one or more missing or incorrect >>> Signed-off-by lines: >>> >>> - author signoff <krzkreg@gmail.com> is missing. >>> >>> Please see the file Documentation/SubmittingPatches, section 11 >>> for details on signing off patches. >> >> Lots of people use it without a problem. I've just run the parser >> through its offline tests, and it parses email content correctly. >> I've no idea what you're doing wrong, but it looks like something >> pretty serious if it didn't parse the subject line. >> >> Rather than getting stressed about it, why don't you send me an email >> the first time something goes wrong so I can investigate, turn on >> debugging to capture the problem email? > > ... and I'll also point out one of the biggest problems is people. > People who think it's more complex than it is, or who can't read > instructions. We all read submitting-patches instructions (and many more). A need to learn one more set of instructions for one more process leads to people needing to learn 100 different processes for 100 different subsystems. That's not the way how people should be contributing to Linux kernel. > > For example, trying to tell people to use the standard format subject > line: > > [PATCH ...] blah > > has proven to be hopeless - unless one states to them the exact > sequence of keys on their keyboard to press - yes, it *really* takes > that patronising level to get everyone to understand. If one tries to > do it any other way, then you get stuff like: > > "[PATCH ...] ..." > > with the quotes. Or some other stupid variation. > > The patch system is as forgiving as possible. It takes standard git > formatted patches (with the exception of wanting an additional tag). The additional tag about kernel version is redundant and not helping anyone. I doubt you apply patches on top of linux-next or top of previous release (e.g. v6.8-rc1). Almost every maintainer applies on top of current RC, so v6.9-rc1 currently, thus version is just unnecessary obstacle. > > It is possible that bugs creep in - particularly when Debian updates > get applied and change the way Perl works, but I don't think that's > what has happened with your situation. > > I _guess_ you're putting the entire email-like output from git > format-patch as the patch file. That won't work - that isn't a "patch > file", that is an email/email template, and the patch system will > attempt to parse that as the patch itself. Yes, that's what every sane person's workflow is. git format-patch -19 (cover letter goes from branch description). > > I suppose you term "patch" to be the email as well, rather than what > I interpret it to be, which is only the output of "diff" - call me > old fashioned but that's what a patch file used to be before the > waters got muddied by git "patch files". Well, world is now using git as a standard. It's true there is quilt out there, but even Andrew I think is going slowly towards git in some parts of his workflow. But then even Andrew accepted standard patch from the mailing lists. No need for any other step, no need for any double submission (one public, second to patches@armlinux or webform) with any other requirement. Best regards, Krzysztof
On Tue, Apr 02, 2024 at 11:48:08AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 02/04/2024 10:56, Russell King (Oracle) wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 30, 2024 at 01:18:30PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >> On 26/03/2024 21:23, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >>> Merging > >>> ======= > >>> All further patches depend on the first amba patch, therefore please ack > >>> and this should go via one tree. > >>> > >>> Description > >>> =========== > >>> Modules registering driver with amba_driver_register() often forget to > >>> set .owner field. > >>> > >>> Solve the problem by moving this task away from the drivers to the core > >>> amba bus code, just like we did for platform_driver in commit > >>> 9447057eaff8 ("platform_device: use a macro instead of > >>> platform_driver_register"). > >>> > >>> Best regards, > >> > >> I tried to submit this series to Russell patch tracker and failed. This > >> is ridiculous. It's 2024 and instead of normal process, like every other > >> maintainer, so b4 or Patchwork, we have some unusable system rejecting > >> standard patches. > > > > Sorry but no. Stop being offensive. > > > >> First, it depends some weird, duplicated signed-off-by's. > > > > Eh? There is no such logic in there. > > In the web system there is - read the error message I pasted. It wants > another SoB from the unrelated email account, the one used purely for > registering in some web system, not the one used for code handling. So you're disagreeing with the author of this system. Of course you know best, you know the code behind it. I have only one word for that kind of attitude: idiotic. > >> Second it > submitting patch-by-patch, all with clicking on some web > >> (!!!) interface. > > > > Again, no it doesn't, and you're just throwing crap out because you > > failed. Unlike most of the "normal" processes, the patch system allows > > you to submit both by *email* and also by *web* for those cases where > > The email one requires additional steps, so this is unnecessary work > confusing submitters. I submit dozens or hundreds of patches every > release cycle. That's the only subsystem which is odd to use. Lots of people use it without issue. People even send patches to the mailing list copied to the patch system. > > the emails get screwed up by ones company mail server. That's why the > > web interface exists - to give people *flexibility*. > > No, they are not. None of my emails are screwed by my company system. So why are you using the web interface? > > Why does it want the kernel version? Because when we were running 2.4 > > and 2.5 kernel versions in parallel, it was important to know which > > tree the patch was being submitted for. It has continued to be required > > Which is absolutely ridiculous now. Expecting submitters to adhere to > some rule for 20 year old kernel is not reasonable. You aren't listening to me, so it's pointless discussing this further. You have a bee in your bonet and you want to make it a huge issue rather than work constructively. Sorry but no, I'm not going to continue this confrontational exchange. You clearly don't want to understand anything.
On 02/04/2024 11:57, Russell King (Oracle) wrote: > On Tue, Apr 02, 2024 at 11:48:08AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 02/04/2024 10:56, Russell King (Oracle) wrote: >>> On Sat, Mar 30, 2024 at 01:18:30PM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>> On 26/03/2024 21:23, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>>> Merging >>>>> ======= >>>>> All further patches depend on the first amba patch, therefore please ack >>>>> and this should go via one tree. >>>>> >>>>> Description >>>>> =========== >>>>> Modules registering driver with amba_driver_register() often forget to >>>>> set .owner field. >>>>> >>>>> Solve the problem by moving this task away from the drivers to the core >>>>> amba bus code, just like we did for platform_driver in commit >>>>> 9447057eaff8 ("platform_device: use a macro instead of >>>>> platform_driver_register"). >>>>> >>>>> Best regards, >>>> >>>> I tried to submit this series to Russell patch tracker and failed. This >>>> is ridiculous. It's 2024 and instead of normal process, like every other >>>> maintainer, so b4 or Patchwork, we have some unusable system rejecting >>>> standard patches. >>> >>> Sorry but no. Stop being offensive. >>> >>>> First, it depends some weird, duplicated signed-off-by's. >>> >>> Eh? There is no such logic in there. >> >> In the web system there is - read the error message I pasted. It wants >> another SoB from the unrelated email account, the one used purely for >> registering in some web system, not the one used for code handling. > > So you're disagreeing with the author of this system. Of course you > know best, you know the code behind it. I have only one word for > that kind of attitude: idiotic. I pasted you the error which the system reported to me. > >>>> Second it > submitting patch-by-patch, all with clicking on some web >>>> (!!!) interface. >>> >>> Again, no it doesn't, and you're just throwing crap out because you >>> failed. Unlike most of the "normal" processes, the patch system allows >>> you to submit both by *email* and also by *web* for those cases where >> >> The email one requires additional steps, so this is unnecessary work >> confusing submitters. I submit dozens or hundreds of patches every >> release cycle. That's the only subsystem which is odd to use. > > Lots of people use it without issue. People even send patches to the > mailing list copied to the patch system. > I will try that. >>> the emails get screwed up by ones company mail server. That's why the >>> web interface exists - to give people *flexibility*. >> >> No, they are not. None of my emails are screwed by my company system. > > So why are you using the web interface? > >>> Why does it want the kernel version? Because when we were running 2.4 >>> and 2.5 kernel versions in parallel, it was important to know which >>> tree the patch was being submitted for. It has continued to be required >> >> Which is absolutely ridiculous now. Expecting submitters to adhere to >> some rule for 20 year old kernel is not reasonable. > > You aren't listening to me, so it's pointless discussing this further. > You have a bee in your bonet and you want to make it a huge issue Well, all my comments were about the actual topic - patch submission process made for ARM subsystem by you. Your replies include comments about me and what do I have in my bonet. You brought no argument for keeping the kernel-version-header requirement nowadays, yet you call me of not working constructively. I brought that argument - it is redundant and it is an obstacle for the contributor. > rather than work constructively. Sorry but no, I'm not going to continue > this confrontational exchange. > > You clearly don't want to understand anything. I understood a lot, although I did not answer under every point "I understand this part, I disagree here". Best regards, Krzysztof
On Tue, Apr 02, 2024 at 12:04:07PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > You brought no argument for keeping the kernel-version-header > requirement nowadays, yet you call me of not working constructively. I So add inability to read to your failings, because I _did_ state that _I_ still _use_ it. End of discussion, I'm not engaging with you in your current confrontational mood where you clearly don't want to understand anything (or intentionally misinterpreting) I'm writing - making it pointless to continue. I even think you're intentionally misinterpreting the responses from the patch system. Overall, I can only draw the conclusion that you are playing politics and want the patch system gone, and you want me to use "standard" tooling that will _increase_ the amount of effort I need to put in. No, that's not going to happen.
On Tue, Apr 02, 2024 at 11:12:36AM +0100, Russell King (Oracle) wrote: > On Tue, Apr 02, 2024 at 12:04:07PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > You brought no argument for keeping the kernel-version-header > > requirement nowadays, yet you call me of not working constructively. I > > So add inability to read to your failings, because I _did_ state that > _I_ still _use_ it. > > End of discussion, I'm not engaging with you in your current > confrontational mood where you clearly don't want to understand > anything (or intentionally misinterpreting) I'm writing - making it > pointless to continue. > > I even think you're intentionally misinterpreting the responses > from the patch system. > > Overall, I can only draw the conclusion that you are playing politics > and want the patch system gone, and you want me to use "standard" > tooling that will _increase_ the amount of effort I need to put in. > No, that's not going to happen. ... and this is your final chance to change to a constructive discourse, if not, you are going to end up in my kill file. Whether you do is entirely up to the tone of your reply to this email. I am always more than willing to work with a submitter to diagnose what the problem is, but the tone of your emails make me want to ignore you.
+ Greg Hi Krzysztof, On 30/03/2024 18:00, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 30/03/2024 18:58, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> >> On Tue, 26 Mar 2024 21:23:30 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>> Merging >>> ======= >>> All further patches depend on the first amba patch, therefore please ack >>> and this should go via one tree. >>> >>> Description >>> =========== >>> Modules registering driver with amba_driver_register() often forget to >>> set .owner field. >>> >>> [...] >> >> Applied, thanks! >> >> [01/19] amba: store owner from modules with amba_driver_register() >> (no commit info) > > Patchset applied here: > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/krzk/linux-dt.git/log/?h=for-v6.10/module-owner-amba How do you plan to push this ? Given this affects most of the drivers/, do you plan to send this to Greg ? We have changes in the coresight tree that would conflict with this "tag" ( I haven't merged them yet, but is in my local queue). I want to make sure we can avoid the conflicts. I am happy to merge this to my local tree and base the changes on this, if this is going in for v6.10 and all are in agreement. Kind regards Suzuki > > Best regards, > Krzysztof >
On 16/04/2024 12:41, Suzuki K Poulose wrote: > + Greg > > > Hi Krzysztof, > > On 30/03/2024 18:00, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 30/03/2024 18:58, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>> >>> On Tue, 26 Mar 2024 21:23:30 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>> Merging >>>> ======= >>>> All further patches depend on the first amba patch, therefore please ack >>>> and this should go via one tree. >>>> >>>> Description >>>> =========== >>>> Modules registering driver with amba_driver_register() often forget to >>>> set .owner field. >>>> >>>> [...] >>> >>> Applied, thanks! >>> >>> [01/19] amba: store owner from modules with amba_driver_register() >>> (no commit info) >> >> Patchset applied here: >> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/krzk/linux-dt.git/log/?h=for-v6.10/module-owner-amba > > How do you plan to push this ? Given this affects most of the drivers/, > do you plan to send this to Greg ? We have changes in the coresight > tree that would conflict with this "tag" ( I haven't merged them yet, > but is in my local queue). I want to make sure we can avoid the > conflicts. I am happy to merge this to my local tree and base the > changes on this, if this is going in for v6.10 and all are in agreement. I pushed it to arm-linux patches but it hasn't been picked up. I propose you take entire set then. Best regards, Krzysztof
On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 03:29:26PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 16/04/2024 12:41, Suzuki K Poulose wrote: > > + Greg > > > > > > Hi Krzysztof, > > > > On 30/03/2024 18:00, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >> On 30/03/2024 18:58, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >>> > >>> On Tue, 26 Mar 2024 21:23:30 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > >>>> Merging > >>>> ======= > >>>> All further patches depend on the first amba patch, therefore please ack > >>>> and this should go via one tree. > >>>> > >>>> Description > >>>> =========== > >>>> Modules registering driver with amba_driver_register() often forget to > >>>> set .owner field. > >>>> > >>>> [...] > >>> > >>> Applied, thanks! > >>> > >>> [01/19] amba: store owner from modules with amba_driver_register() > >>> (no commit info) > >> > >> Patchset applied here: > >> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/krzk/linux-dt.git/log/?h=for-v6.10/module-owner-amba > > > > How do you plan to push this ? Given this affects most of the drivers/, > > do you plan to send this to Greg ? We have changes in the coresight > > tree that would conflict with this "tag" ( I haven't merged them yet, > > but is in my local queue). I want to make sure we can avoid the > > conflicts. I am happy to merge this to my local tree and base the > > changes on this, if this is going in for v6.10 and all are in agreement. > > I pushed it to arm-linux patches but it hasn't been picked up. > > I propose you take entire set then. You are again being, IMHO, abrasive with your attitude. So far, every interaction with you has been abrasive and bordering on abusive. You haven't asked me whether I will take them. I will - just not at the moment because I HAVE MEDICAL APPOINTMENTS LAST WEEK AND THIS WEEK WHICH MEAN I AM NOT SPENDING ALL MY TIME ON THE KERNEL. Have some bloody patience rather than behaving in your standard objectionable manner.
On 17/04/2024 15:50, Russell King (Oracle) wrote: > On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 03:29:26PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 16/04/2024 12:41, Suzuki K Poulose wrote: >>> + Greg >>> >>> >>> Hi Krzysztof, >>> >>> On 30/03/2024 18:00, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>> On 30/03/2024 18:58, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, 26 Mar 2024 21:23:30 +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>>>> Merging >>>>>> ======= >>>>>> All further patches depend on the first amba patch, therefore please ack >>>>>> and this should go via one tree. >>>>>> >>>>>> Description >>>>>> =========== >>>>>> Modules registering driver with amba_driver_register() often forget to >>>>>> set .owner field. >>>>>> >>>>>> [...] >>>>> >>>>> Applied, thanks! >>>>> >>>>> [01/19] amba: store owner from modules with amba_driver_register() >>>>> (no commit info) >>>> >>>> Patchset applied here: >>>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/krzk/linux-dt.git/log/?h=for-v6.10/module-owner-amba >>> >>> How do you plan to push this ? Given this affects most of the drivers/, >>> do you plan to send this to Greg ? We have changes in the coresight >>> tree that would conflict with this "tag" ( I haven't merged them yet, >>> but is in my local queue). I want to make sure we can avoid the >>> conflicts. I am happy to merge this to my local tree and base the >>> changes on this, if this is going in for v6.10 and all are in agreement. >> >> I pushed it to arm-linux patches but it hasn't been picked up. >> >> I propose you take entire set then. > > You are again being, IMHO, abrasive with your attitude. So far, every > interaction with you has been abrasive and bordering on abusive. > > You haven't asked me whether I will take them. I will - just not at the > moment because Thanks for confirming, I wanted to ping you because there was no feedback. Can you provide stable tag for coresight tree? Best regards, Krzysztof
Merging ======= All further patches depend on the first amba patch, therefore please ack and this should go via one tree. Description =========== Modules registering driver with amba_driver_register() often forget to set .owner field. Solve the problem by moving this task away from the drivers to the core amba bus code, just like we did for platform_driver in commit 9447057eaff8 ("platform_device: use a macro instead of platform_driver_register"). Best regards, Krzysztof --- Krzysztof Kozlowski (19): amba: store owner from modules with amba_driver_register() coresight: cti: drop owner assignment coresight: catu: drop owner assignment coresight: etm3x: drop owner assignment coresight: etm4x: drop owner assignment coresight: funnel: drop owner assignment coresight: replicator: drop owner assignment coresight: etb10: drop owner assignment coresight: stm: drop owner assignment coresight: tmc: drop owner assignment coresight: tpda: drop owner assignment coresight: tpdm: drop owner assignment coresight: tpiu: drop owner assignment i2c: nomadik: drop owner assignment hwrng: nomadik: drop owner assignment dmaengine: pl330: drop owner assignment Input: ambakmi - drop owner assignment memory: pl353-smc: drop owner assignment vfio: amba: drop owner assignment drivers/amba/bus.c | 11 +++++++---- drivers/char/hw_random/nomadik-rng.c | 1 - drivers/dma/pl330.c | 1 - drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-catu.c | 1 - drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-cti-core.c | 1 - drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-etb10.c | 1 - drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-etm3x-core.c | 1 - drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-etm4x-core.c | 1 - drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-funnel.c | 1 - drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-replicator.c | 1 - drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-stm.c | 1 - drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-tmc-core.c | 1 - drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-tpda.c | 1 - drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-tpdm.c | 1 - drivers/hwtracing/coresight/coresight-tpiu.c | 1 - drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-nomadik.c | 1 - drivers/input/serio/ambakmi.c | 1 - drivers/memory/pl353-smc.c | 1 - drivers/vfio/platform/vfio_amba.c | 1 - include/linux/amba/bus.h | 11 +++++++++-- 20 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-) --- base-commit: 1fdad13606e104ff103ca19d2d660830cb36d43e change-id: 20240326-module-owner-amba-3ebb65256be7 Best regards,