mbox series

[v1,0/6] thermal: netlink: Redefine the API and drop unused code

Message ID 4556052.LvFx2qVVIh@kreacher
Headers
Series thermal: netlink: Redefine the API and drop unused code |

Message

Rafael J. Wysocki Dec. 15, 2023, 7:51 p.m. UTC 
  Hi Everyone,

This patch series redefines the thermal netlink API to be somewhat more
convenient to use on the caller side and drops some unused code from
the thermal netlink library.

Please refer to the individual patch changelogs for details.

Thanks!

Comments

Rafael J. Wysocki Jan. 2, 2024, 1:24 p.m. UTC | #1 
On Fri, Dec 15, 2023 at 9:02 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net> wrote:
>
> Hi Everyone,
>
> This patch series redefines the thermal netlink API to be somewhat more
> convenient to use on the caller side and drops some unused code from
> the thermal netlink library.
>
> Please refer to the individual patch changelogs for details.

No feedback, so this series doesn't appear to be controversial, and I
would like to get it into 6.8.

Tentatively queuing it up and please let me know if it is problematic.

Thanks!
Lukasz Luba Jan. 3, 2024, 8:11 a.m. UTC | #2 
Hi Rafael,

On 1/2/24 13:24, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 15, 2023 at 9:02 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Everyone,
>>
>> This patch series redefines the thermal netlink API to be somewhat more
>> convenient to use on the caller side and drops some unused code from
>> the thermal netlink library.
>>
>> Please refer to the individual patch changelogs for details.
> 
> No feedback, so this series doesn't appear to be controversial, and I
> would like to get it into 6.8.
> 
> Tentatively queuing it up and please let me know if it is problematic.
> 
> Thanks!
> 

I agree, these are not controversial patches, so IMO queuing them is OK.
I took a glance at them, but I can do the proper review today if you
like.

Regards,
Lukasz
Daniel Lezcano Jan. 3, 2024, 9:53 a.m. UTC | #3 
Hi Rafael,

On 02/01/2024 14:24, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 15, 2023 at 9:02 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Everyone,
>>
>> This patch series redefines the thermal netlink API to be somewhat more
>> convenient to use on the caller side and drops some unused code from
>> the thermal netlink library.
>>
>> Please refer to the individual patch changelogs for details.
> 
> No feedback, so this series doesn't appear to be controversial, and I
> would like to get it into 6.8.
> 
> Tentatively queuing it up and please let me know if it is problematic.

I did not have time to review them properly and I'm OoO until next week. 
Is it possible to wait for the next time so I can review them ?
Rafael J. Wysocki Jan. 3, 2024, 10:24 a.m. UTC | #4 
Hi Lukasz,

On Wed, Jan 3, 2024 at 9:10 AM Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Rafael,
>
> On 1/2/24 13:24, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 15, 2023 at 9:02 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Everyone,
> >>
> >> This patch series redefines the thermal netlink API to be somewhat more
> >> convenient to use on the caller side and drops some unused code from
> >> the thermal netlink library.
> >>
> >> Please refer to the individual patch changelogs for details.
> >
> > No feedback, so this series doesn't appear to be controversial, and I
> > would like to get it into 6.8.
> >
> > Tentatively queuing it up and please let me know if it is problematic.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
>
> I agree, these are not controversial patches, so IMO queuing them is OK.
> I took a glance at them, but I can do the proper review today if you
> like.

Well, if you can allocate some time for that, it would be appreciated!
Rafael J. Wysocki Jan. 3, 2024, 10:26 a.m. UTC | #5 
Hi Daniel,

On Wed, Jan 3, 2024 at 10:54 AM Daniel Lezcano
<daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> wrote:
>
>
> Hi Rafael,
>
> On 02/01/2024 14:24, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 15, 2023 at 9:02 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Everyone,
> >>
> >> This patch series redefines the thermal netlink API to be somewhat more
> >> convenient to use on the caller side and drops some unused code from
> >> the thermal netlink library.
> >>
> >> Please refer to the individual patch changelogs for details.
> >
> > No feedback, so this series doesn't appear to be controversial, and I
> > would like to get it into 6.8.
> >
> > Tentatively queuing it up and please let me know if it is problematic.
>
> I did not have time to review them properly and I'm OoO until next week.
> Is it possible to wait for the next time so I can review them ?

I can defer them a few days of course, but if Lukasz can review them
in the meantime, I think that should be sufficient?
Lukasz Luba Jan. 3, 2024, 11:14 a.m. UTC | #6 
On 1/3/24 10:24, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> Hi Lukasz,
> 
> On Wed, Jan 3, 2024 at 9:10 AM Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@arm.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Rafael,
>>
>> On 1/2/24 13:24, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>> On Fri, Dec 15, 2023 at 9:02 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Everyone,
>>>>
>>>> This patch series redefines the thermal netlink API to be somewhat more
>>>> convenient to use on the caller side and drops some unused code from
>>>> the thermal netlink library.
>>>>
>>>> Please refer to the individual patch changelogs for details.
>>>
>>> No feedback, so this series doesn't appear to be controversial, and I
>>> would like to get it into 6.8.
>>>
>>> Tentatively queuing it up and please let me know if it is problematic.
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>
>> I agree, these are not controversial patches, so IMO queuing them is OK.
>> I took a glance at them, but I can do the proper review today if you
>> like.
> 
> Well, if you can allocate some time for that, it would be appreciated!

Sure, no problem, I'll do that today.