From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com (out3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.27]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C0A3885923; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 20:01:30 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=66.111.4.27 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1710964893; cv=none; b=BEL8NKml+GSfrh0x3Wa77k8TYsBd/dWD5JhsHMWl5R8f7ePNxw+EboeDlIOnX9xMDMSlr1Z3R8CMqMvc9zUL+RdTfmIcXQZ4j31VYRn1YUk/xjKEjDj6jDWQuCQuLA4X3AtRSTAj0kKkJITwFFDg38vTR+IAOsZXiXBZPmAnr00= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1710964893; c=relaxed/simple; bh=IeLoxB+NsSJEWuKPkn/vovqzZ0GvfZSkvqANV6t7FIo=; h=MIME-Version:Message-Id:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From:To:Cc: Subject:Content-Type; b=DhNoW8Hcog6BTCsGQibLPlKmNlkOxemhGc6aEeXu70WWuuCZdQfACs0mR5usxOYV5YLGVkJFIGXMap3Zhl5Jeo+spuPSbN9Y6NRO8SpEohGCDdLDv+D7heBi7mYLuikyl8YOAArpBrMuV3NTDFhTiZ6jnybIEgK+D0SCPp/rHtc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=ljones.dev; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=ljones.dev; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ljones.dev header.i=@ljones.dev header.b=TIlQOZ5j; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=UsiUIFyI; arc=none smtp.client-ip=66.111.4.27 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=ljones.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=ljones.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ljones.dev header.i=@ljones.dev header.b="TIlQOZ5j"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="UsiUIFyI" Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A2A05C006A; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 16:01:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap41 ([10.202.2.91]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 20 Mar 2024 16:01:29 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ljones.dev; h=cc :cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:date :date:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm3; t=1710964889; x=1711051289; bh=AZSqN4s5zsG3HqEikLmq10h58qPWmcD/hoS2dTSCdbg=; b= TIlQOZ5jXkvVFAJaxUGXZHmbWaqvKxcTFdabnmW+hJpcgxON9S58WfllXNNftVP8 UJIXMiwQWEc3Ammu+nbGh6c5LG/YYbk4RrZ3CL2yO+ToLbSJF+DyZAudpRtabn8I 3qcPD12ostETxRrKT/9f5SeIsM3Hcfsyn0MqOsFQWSXLjCZxnTLvgGQU7QyiyFyD 650aD5TqWKgRVZKKe8riLBHrBb0KeJVDBCGDmY3mN9m2QO48vr9/J5znuunTGzgM GlGEaJVsQyONfIJ9pBHYg4taZHHAYWEDpHYMBchoz0IuZV1EapXGf/QP0BbYnudH LacqtH+56wpRqYk7dV99DA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id :from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; t=1710964889; x= 1711051289; bh=AZSqN4s5zsG3HqEikLmq10h58qPWmcD/hoS2dTSCdbg=; b=U siUIFyIzk2xcW4jJT+UvcbdFcli49JWvxKj0rmXNwbMxKqQEb6uCkKf1H22AX6JE lyvcReqVGy8pB//wa+8iwab4bRVTRP/EaABY0xXyGQjiLpCtwhSVkWKycr1HYIJH PuGZ8FdDaSPhAaIAxauAk3z8TN+cgl5wIMEiNA27KohcKqDDe+RxIiSBWFVBmy2P zxJS9kf4H6lSz3I8JF7lxVa6V7VqZT+VFQDIhYxCWV3q10Efuo3CUCv+pxNZnfAW j1XVSsl+LFUbUwIRyYnbSM+7hdWr5SaZLbbs18NXyRdQQE46bQCWJRO5D0wegqpz T1jN8FXSZBeAemr6K475g== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvledrleeggddufeduucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvfevufgtgfesthhqredtreerjeenucfhrhhomhepfdfn uhhkvgculfhonhgvshdfuceolhhukhgvsehljhhonhgvshdruggvvheqnecuggftrfgrth htvghrnhepfeeugffhvdeufeehieelvdegfeffveegleehtddvheegkeetueegtdegueeh vdelnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomheplh hukhgvsehljhhonhgvshdruggvvh X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i5ec1447f:Fastmail Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 381572340080; Wed, 20 Mar 2024 16:01:29 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.11.0-alpha0-332-gdeb4194079-fm-20240319.002-gdeb41940 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <5d5e8895-8843-a0bf-de97-b293528a0643@linux.intel.com> References: <20240320011442.11608-1-luke@ljones.dev> <20240320011442.11608-2-luke@ljones.dev> <5d5e8895-8843-a0bf-de97-b293528a0643@linux.intel.com> Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2024 09:01:07 +1300 From: "Luke Jones" To: =?UTF-8?Q?Ilpo_J=C3=A4rvinen?= Cc: "Hans de Goede" , corentin.chary@gmail.com, platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] platform/x86: asus-wmi: add support variant of TUF RGB Content-Type: text/plain;charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, 21 Mar 2024, at 12:36 AM, Ilpo J=C3=A4rvinen wrote: > On Wed, 20 Mar 2024, Luke D. Jones wrote: >=20 > > Adds support for a second TUF RGB wmi call that some versions of the= TUF > > laptop come with. Also adjusts existing support to select whichever = is > > available. > >=20 > > Signed-off-by: Luke D. Jones > > --- > > drivers/platform/x86/asus-wmi.c | 13 +++++++++++-- > > include/linux/platform_data/x86/asus-wmi.h | 1 + > > 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > >=20 > > diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/asus-wmi.c b/drivers/platform/x86/= asus-wmi.c > > index b9a2fb8007c0..0d8a2b82cc06 100644 > > --- a/drivers/platform/x86/asus-wmi.c > > +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/asus-wmi.c >=20 > > @@ -4544,6 +4545,14 @@ static int asus_wmi_add(struct platform_devic= e *pdev) > > asus->gpu_mux_dev =3D ASUS_WMI_DEVID_GPU_MUX_VIVO; > > } > > =20 > > + if (asus_wmi_dev_is_present(asus, ASUS_WMI_DEVID_TUF_RGB_MODE)) { >=20 > The patch itself is fine, >=20 > Reviewed-by: Ilpo J=C3=A4rvinen >=20 > However, >=20 > There's a major problem in the way you're submitting these. This patch= is=20 > built on top of the GPU_MUX_VIVO patch as can be seen from the context > above. Yet, you're sending these independently instead of series. I=20 > suspect there are other similar problems among these patches that ther= e's=20 > hidden dependency order in which these should be applied. This will ca= use=20 > problems if maintainer applies the patches in wrong order (they may ev= en=20 > misapply with fuzz). >=20 > Only if the patches are truly independent, that is, focus on solving=20 > entirely differently thing (functional independency) and do not have a= ny=20 > linewise conflicts (code locality independecy) either, it's fine to se= nd=20 > patches as independent ones without making a series out of them. But=20 > clearly it's not the case here. Honestly, yeah I should have made them a series. I was sick at the time = of submission and shouldn't have been near a computer at all but I have = a long backlog. I'll go through your other reviews and then turn the lot in as a series = to prevent any mishaps.