| Message ID | 20191023200233.86616-1-dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | software node: add support for reference properties | expand |
Hi Rafael, On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 01:02:18PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > These series implement "references" properties for software nodes as true > properties, instead of managing them completely separately. > > The first 10 patches are generic cleanups and consolidation and > unification of the existing code; patch #11 implements moving of small > properties inline when copying property entries; patch #12 implements > PROPERTY_ENTRY_REF() and friends; patch #13 converts the user of > references to the property syntax, and patch #14 removes the remains of > references as entities that are managed separately. > > Patch #15 adds unit tests to verify that the handling of property > entries is correct. Do you have any concerns with the series? I think Andy did all the reviewing that he could... Thanks! > > Changes in v6: > - rebased onto next-20191023 > - fixed patch moving small properties inline > - fixed handling boolean properties after is_array -> is_inline > conversion > - changed comments around is_inline "stored directly" vs embedded > in one place (Andy) > - added unit tests for property entries based on KUnit framework > - added Any's reviewed-by/acked-by > > Changes in v5: > - rebased onto next-20191011 > > Changes in v4: > - dealt with union aliasing concerns > - inline small properties on copy > > Changes in v3: > - added various cleanups before implementing reference properties > > Changes in v2: > - reworked code so that even single-entry reference properties are > stored as arrays (i.e. the software_node_ref_args instances are > not part of property_entry structure) to avoid size increase. > From user's POV nothing is changed, one can still use PROPERTY_ENTRY_REF > macro to define reference "inline". > - dropped unused DEV_PROP_MAX > - rebased on linux-next > > Dmitry Torokhov (15): > software node: remove DEV_PROP_MAX > software node: introduce PROPERTY_ENTRY_ARRAY_XXX_LEN() > efi/apple-properties: use PROPERTY_ENTRY_U8_ARRAY_LEN > software node: mark internal macros with double underscores > software node: clean up property_copy_string_array() > software node: get rid of property_set_pointer() > software node: remove property_entry_read_uNN_array functions > software node: unify PROPERTY_ENTRY_XXX macros > software node: simplify property_entry_read_string_array() > software node: rename is_array to is_inline > software node: move small properties inline when copying > software node: implement reference properties > platform/x86: intel_cht_int33fe: use inline reference properties > software node: remove separate handling of references > software node: add basic tests for property entries > > drivers/base/swnode.c | 263 ++++------ > drivers/base/test/Makefile | 2 + > drivers/base/test/property-entry-test.c | 472 ++++++++++++++++++ > drivers/firmware/efi/apple-properties.c | 18 +- > .../platform/x86/intel_cht_int33fe_typec.c | 81 +-- > include/linux/property.h | 178 +++---- > 6 files changed, 702 insertions(+), 312 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 drivers/base/test/property-entry-test.c > > -- > 2.23.0.866.gb869b98d4c-goog >
On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 11:43 PM Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Rafael, > > On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 01:02:18PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > > These series implement "references" properties for software nodes as true > > properties, instead of managing them completely separately. > > > > The first 10 patches are generic cleanups and consolidation and > > unification of the existing code; patch #11 implements moving of small > > properties inline when copying property entries; patch #12 implements > > PROPERTY_ENTRY_REF() and friends; patch #13 converts the user of > > references to the property syntax, and patch #14 removes the remains of > > references as entities that are managed separately. > > > > Patch #15 adds unit tests to verify that the handling of property > > entries is correct. > > Do you have any concerns with the series? I think Andy did all the > reviewing that he could... Yes, he did, and he is unconvinced. I basically have no problems with patches [1-9/15], so I'm going to queue them up for 5.5. Patch [10/15] by itself is kind of pointless IMO, so it'll depend on what happens to the rest. Patch [11/15] kind of causes brows to rise, so let me reply to it directly.