Hi Arend,
>>>>> Since commit 3c47d19ff4dc ("drivers: base: add coredump driver ops")
>>>>> it is possible to initiate a device coredump from user-space. This
>>>>> patch adds support for it adding the .coredump() driver callback.
>>>>> As there is no longer a need to initiate it through debugfs remove
>>>>> that code.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspr...@broadcom.com>
>>>>
>>>> Based on the discussion I assume this is ok to take to w-d-next. If that's
>>>> not
>>>> the case, please let me know ASAP.
>>>
>>> It is up to the mwifiex maintainers to decide, I guess. The ABI
>>> documentation need to be revised and change the callback to void
>>> return type. I am not sure what the best approach is. 1) apply this
>>> and fix return type later, or 2) fix return type and resubmit this.
>>> What is your opinion?
>>
>> I guess the callback change will go through Greg's tree? Then I suspect
>> it's easier that you submit the callback change to Greg first and wait
>> for it to trickle down to wireless-drivers-next (after the next merge
>> window) and then I can apply the driver patches. Otherwise there might
>> be a conflict between my and Greg's tree.
>
> That was my assessment, but unfortunately Marcel already applied the btmrvl
> patch before I could reply. So how do I move from here? Option 1) revert
> brmrvl and fix callback return type, or 2) apply mwifiex patch and fix
> callback return type later for both drivers.
I can take the patch back out of bluetooth-next if needed. It is your call.
Regards
Marcel
