Re: [DMARC error][SPF error] Re: [PATCH v4 00/10] devm_led_classdev_register() usage problem

From: Andy Shevchenko
Date: Tue Feb 13 2024 - 05:56:14 EST

On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 2:14 AM George Stark <gnstark@salutedevicescom> wrote:
> Hello Andy
> On 2/12/24 12:53, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 1:52 AM George Stark <gnstark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> I haven't lose hope for the devm_mutex thing and keep pinging those guys
> >> from time to time.
> >
> > I don't understand. According to v4 thread Christophe proposed on how
> > the patch should look like. What you need is to incorporate an updated
> > version into your series. Am I wrong?
> We agreed that the effective way of implementing devm_mutex_init() is in
> mutex.h using forward declaration of struct device.
> The only inconvenient thing is that in the mutex.h mutex_init() declared
> after mutex_destroy() so we'll have to use condition #ifdef
> CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES twice. Waiman Long proposed great cleanup patch [1]
> that eliminates the need of doubling #ifdef. That patch was reviewed a
> bit but it's still unapplied (near 2 months). I'm still trying to
> contact mutex.h guys but there're no any feedback yet.

So the roadmap (as I see it) is:
- convince Lee to take the first patch while waiting for the others
- incorporate the above mentioned patch into your series
- make an ultimatum in case there is no reaction to get it applied on
deadline, let's say within next cycle (if Lee is okay with a such, but
this is normal practice when some maintainers are non-responsive)

P.S. In case Lee doesn't want to take the first patch separately
(let's say this week), send a new version with amended patches

> [1]

With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko