> So I'm not super all over the putting all sorts of code inside CONFIG_CXL_EEH, > I understand that there is another driver being merged and they'll use > CONFIG_CXL_EEH so that both this driver and the other driver can go in the > same > merge window but does this mean you need to put it around everything here? > > I may have misunderstood what you've told me but if the other driver depends > on > work done in this one (and not the other way around), if they depend on > CONFIG_CXL_EEH which you create in the last patch, then they cannot be built > until this series exists, so they can't have issues. > > The one catch is that this series as is waits untill the last patch to > actually > create the symbol, and therefore compile everything so lets be sure you don't > break bisecting. You might need to rethink the order of things in 8/10 and > 9/10, > I can't see anything obvious if it helps... >
Yeah, so you're right. I've taken the guards off everything except the new API function. I still want to leave the patch that adds the symbol at the end: that way you don't get the function unless it is actually going to make a difference in the EEH process. The other driver (cxlflash) just guards the API function, inserting a stub if it's not defined. So this setup will make our code cleaner and will still let their code merge cleanly. Thanks again for the review. -- Regards, Daniel
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
