Re: [PATCH v3] power: supply: test-power: implement charge_behaviour property

[Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>]

Hi,

On 3/27/24 2:25 PM, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> Hello Hans,
> 
> On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 11:44:41AM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
>> On 3/27/24 11:36 AM, Hans de Goede wrote:
>>> On 3/26/24 8:50 PM, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 06 Mar 2024 20:37:04 +0100, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
>>>>> To validate the special formatting of the "charge_behaviour" sysfs
>>>>> property add it to the example driver.
>>>>
>>>> Applied, thanks!
>>>>
>>>> [1/1] power: supply: test-power: implement charge_behaviour property
>>>>       commit: 070c1470ae24317e7b19bd3882b300b6d69922a4
>>>
>>> Does this mean that you've also applied patches 1-3 of:
>>> "[PATCH v2 0/4] power: supply: core: align charge_behaviour format with docs" ?
>>>
>>> Because this is a new version of 4/4 of that series and I think
>>> that the new test may depend on the fixes from patches 1-3
>>> of that series (which I'm reviewing now).
>>
>> Ok, I have some not entirely trivial comments on patch 3/4 of that series.
>> I guess you (Sebastian) could address those while merging, or wait for
>> a v3 of the series.
> 
> I can't. Patches 1-3 are already in 6.9-rc1. It looks you did not
> get my replies, but they certainly have been captured by lore and
> obviously Thomas got them since he send a v3 with just the last
> patch:
> 
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240303-power_supply-charge_behaviour_prop-v2-0-8ebb0a7c2409@weissschuh.net/
> 
> Anyways, I think your suggestions for further simplifications in
> patch 3 are sensible. They just require doing an extra patch now
> instead of being squashed.

Ah I see that is fine too :)

Thomas, can you do a follow-up patch with the simplifications
which I suggested in my review of patch v2 3/4 ?

Regards,

Hans