Message ID | 20230929145123.233838-1-maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Series | sound: Use -EPROBE_DEFER instead of i915 module loading. | expand |
On 10/2/2023 6:52 PM, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: > Now that we can use -EPROBE_DEFER, it's no longer required to spin off > the snd_hdac_i915_init into a workqueue. It's likely the whole workqueue > can be destroyed, but I don't have the means to test this. > > Removing the workqueue would simplify init even further, but is left > as exercise for the reviewer. > > Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com> > Acked-by: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> > Reviewed-by: Kai Vehmanen <kai.vehmanen@linux.intel.com> > Reviewed-by: Amadeusz Sławiński <amadeuszx.slawinski@linux.intel.com> > --- Isn't the convention that your Signed-off should be last when you are sending the patches? Or does it only apply to Signed-off lines themselves and other lines can be anywhere?
On 10/3/2023 8:55 AM, Amadeusz Sławiński wrote: > On 10/2/2023 6:52 PM, Maarten Lankhorst wrote: >> Now that we can use -EPROBE_DEFER, it's no longer required to spin off >> the snd_hdac_i915_init into a workqueue. It's likely the whole workqueue >> can be destroyed, but I don't have the means to test this. >> >> Removing the workqueue would simplify init even further, but is left >> as exercise for the reviewer. >> >> Signed-off-by: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com> >> Acked-by: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> >> Reviewed-by: Kai Vehmanen <kai.vehmanen@linux.intel.com> >> Reviewed-by: Amadeusz Sławiński <amadeuszx.slawinski@linux.intel.com> >> --- > > Isn't the convention that your Signed-off should be last when you are > sending the patches? Or does it only apply to Signed-off lines > themselves and other lines can be anywhere? > And rereading kernel documentation, it really seems to be a bit ambiguous, well ignore the comment then.