From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DAA8C433FF for ; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 13:38:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDA6F208E3 for ; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 13:38:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2387879AbfGaNis (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Jul 2019 09:38:48 -0400 Received: from mga07.intel.com ([134.134.136.100]:13511 "EHLO mga07.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727230AbfGaNis (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Jul 2019 09:38:48 -0400 X-Amp-Result: UNKNOWN X-Amp-Original-Verdict: FILE UNKNOWN X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga007.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.58]) by orsmga105.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 31 Jul 2019 06:38:47 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.64,330,1559545200"; d="scan'208";a="163114354" Received: from smile.fi.intel.com (HELO smile) ([10.237.68.145]) by orsmga007.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 31 Jul 2019 06:38:42 -0700 Received: from andy by smile with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1hsooS-0000IS-9T; Wed, 31 Jul 2019 16:38:40 +0300 Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 16:38:40 +0300 From: Andy Shevchenko To: Dmitry Torokhov Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Richard Gong , "H. Peter Anvin" , Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz , Borislav Petkov , Darren Hart , Florian Fainelli , Ingo Molnar , Sudeep Holla , Thomas Gleixner , Tony Prisk , dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-input@vger.kernel.org, platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/10] drivers, provide a way to add sysfs groups easily Message-ID: <20190731133840.GN23480@smile.fi.intel.com> References: <20190731124349.4474-1-gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> <20190731131045.GB147138@dtor-ws> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190731131045.GB147138@dtor-ws> Organization: Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - Westendinkatu 7, 02160 Espoo User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 06:10:45AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 02:43:39PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > This patch originally started out just as a way for platform drivers to > > easily add a sysfs group in a race-free way, but thanks to Dmitry's > > patch, this series now is for all drivers in the kernel (hey, a unified > > driver model works!!!) > > > > I've only converted a few platform drivers here in this series to show > > how it works, but other busses can be converted after the first patch > > goes into the tree. > > > > Here's the original 00 message, for people to get an idea of what is > > going on here: > > > > If a platform driver wants to add a sysfs group, it has to do so in a > > racy way, adding it after the driver is bound. To resolve this issue, > > have the platform driver core do this for the driver, making the > > individual drivers logic smaller and simpler, and solving the race at > > the same time. > > > > All of these patches depend on the first patch. I'll take the first one > > through my driver-core tree, and any subsystem maintainer can either ack > > their individul patch and I will be glad to also merge it, or they can > > wait until after 5.4-rc1 when the core patch hits Linus's tree and then > > take it, it's up to them. > > Maybe make an immutable branch off 5.2 with just patch 1/10 so that > subsystems (and the driver core tree itself) could pull it in at their > leisure into their "*-next" branches and did not have to wait till 5.4 > or risk merge clashes? Isn't cherry-pick enough for one patch? -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko