From: "Danilo Krummrich" <dakr@kernel.org>
To: "Linus Torvalds" <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: "Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
"Saravana Kannan" <saravanak@kernel.org>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
<driver-core@lists.linux.dev>, <rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Driver core changes for 7.0-rc1
Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2026 19:20:17 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <DGRNJI1NRJC6.1UW5W8NCV547@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <DGRGTIRHA62X.3RY09D9SOK77P@kernel.org>
On Sun Mar 1, 2026 at 2:04 PM CET, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
> Yes, I agree and in fact I already have a few local changes to move
> driver_override to struct device, provide corresponding accessors for busses and
> handle locking with a separate lock.
>
> (Technically, the "move driver_override to struct device" part is orthogonal,
> but doing it right away results in less (and much cleaner) changes.)
>
> I do not consider those changes to be complicated and risky, but I'm not sure
> you want to see those for one of the upcoming -rc releases (probably -rc4/5).
This is roughly what I have in mind [1] (partially compile and runtime tested).
Given that we agree that the driver_match_device() change should be reverted, it
may make sense to land the first patch in an upcoming -rc, split up the treewide
one, and let subsystems follow-up with those fixes individually.
Please let me know what you prefer.
- Danilo
[1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/dakr/linux.git/log/?h=driver_override
> Independently, I can send a revert for -rc3.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-01 18:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-02-11 23:04 Danilo Krummrich
2026-02-12 3:58 ` pr-tracker-bot
2026-03-01 7:44 ` Linus Torvalds
2026-03-01 7:56 ` Linus Torvalds
2026-03-01 13:01 ` Gary Guo
2026-03-01 13:04 ` Danilo Krummrich
2026-03-01 18:17 ` Linus Torvalds
2026-03-01 20:21 ` Danilo Krummrich
2026-03-01 21:01 ` Linus Torvalds
2026-03-02 19:19 ` Danilo Krummrich
2026-03-01 18:20 ` Danilo Krummrich [this message]
2026-04-14 18:39 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2026-04-14 23:04 ` Danilo Krummrich
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=DGRNJI1NRJC6.1UW5W8NCV547@kernel.org \
--to=dakr@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=driver-core@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=saravanak@kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®