mbox series

[v4,0/4] IIO: More HID custom sensors

Message ID 20221124233841.3103-1-p.jungkamp@gmx.net (mailing list archive)
Headers show
Series IIO: More HID custom sensors | expand

Message

Philipp Jungkamp Nov. 24, 2022, 11:38 p.m. UTC
Hello,

I'm sorry for the confusion caused by me sending revisions as replies.
I've now addresses the points raised. As I'm unfamiliar with mailing lists
any recommendation on making the process more seamless is welcome.

Thank you for your time!

v2:
- Patch 1/4:
  - Remove unnecessary comments.
  - Change return type of functions to bool. (introduced an error, fixed in v4)
  - Swallows return value of a function. (fixed in v4)
- Patch 2/4:
  - Create this 'noop' patch that just adds the LISS sensors to the custom
    sensor match table.
- Patch 3/4:
  - Remove some unnecessary newlines in function calls.
- Patch 4/4:
  - Allow for 1 byte human presence reports.

v3:
- Patch 2/4
  - Add missing 'Signed-Off-By'

v4:
- Patch 1/4:
  - Fix return value and error codes on property query.
  - Document and ignore return values for queries of optionally matched
    properties.
  - Don't modify *known in _get_known, return error when not matched.
  - Remove comment on newly added sensors from commit message.
- Patch 4/4:
  - Clean up switch statement.

Regards,
Philipp Jungkamp

Philipp Jungkamp (4):
  HID: hid-sensor-custom: Allow more custom iio sensors
  HID: hid-sensor-custom: Add LISS custom sensors
  IIO: hid-sensor-als: Use generic usage
  IIO: hid-sensor-prox: Use generic usage

 drivers/hid/hid-sensor-custom.c     | 233 +++++++++++++++++++---------
 drivers/iio/light/hid-sensor-als.c  |  27 ++--
 drivers/iio/light/hid-sensor-prox.c |  37 +++--
 include/linux/hid-sensor-ids.h      |   1 +
 4 files changed, 199 insertions(+), 99 deletions(-)

--
2.38.1

Comments

srinivas pandruvada Nov. 27, 2022, 5:33 p.m. UTC | #1
On Fri, 2022-11-25 at 00:38 +0100, Philipp Jungkamp wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I'm sorry for the confusion caused by me sending revisions as replies.
> I've now addresses the points raised. As I'm unfamiliar with mailing
> lists
> any recommendation on making the process more seamless is welcome.
> 
> Thank you for your time!
> 

For the series

Acked-by: Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>


> v2:
> - Patch 1/4:
>   - Remove unnecessary comments.
>   - Change return type of functions to bool. (introduced an error,
> fixed in v4)
>   - Swallows return value of a function. (fixed in v4)
> - Patch 2/4:
>   - Create this 'noop' patch that just adds the LISS sensors to the
> custom
>     sensor match table.
> - Patch 3/4:
>   - Remove some unnecessary newlines in function calls.
> - Patch 4/4:
>   - Allow for 1 byte human presence reports.
> 
> v3:
> - Patch 2/4
>   - Add missing 'Signed-Off-By'
> 
> v4:
> - Patch 1/4:
>   - Fix return value and error codes on property query.
>   - Document and ignore return values for queries of optionally matched
>     properties.
>   - Don't modify *known in _get_known, return error when not matched.
>   - Remove comment on newly added sensors from commit message.
> - Patch 4/4:
>   - Clean up switch statement.
> 
> Regards,
> Philipp Jungkamp
> 
> Philipp Jungkamp (4):
>   HID: hid-sensor-custom: Allow more custom iio sensors
>   HID: hid-sensor-custom: Add LISS custom sensors
>   IIO: hid-sensor-als: Use generic usage
>   IIO: hid-sensor-prox: Use generic usage
> 
>  drivers/hid/hid-sensor-custom.c     | 233 +++++++++++++++++++---------
>  drivers/iio/light/hid-sensor-als.c  |  27 ++--
>  drivers/iio/light/hid-sensor-prox.c |  37 +++--
>  include/linux/hid-sensor-ids.h      |   1 +
>  4 files changed, 199 insertions(+), 99 deletions(-)
> 
> --
> 2.38.1
>
Philipp Jungkamp Dec. 13, 2022, 10:51 p.m. UTC | #2
Hello,

Is there something I still need to do for this to be merged in the next
merge window?

I don't quite understand what would happen next. I'm curious and hope I
don't bother in the busy times when approaching a merge window.

Regards,
Philipp Jungkamp

On Sun, 2022-11-27 at 09:33 -0800, srinivas pandruvada wrote:
> On Fri, 2022-11-25 at 00:38 +0100, Philipp Jungkamp wrote:
> > Hello,
> > 
> > I'm sorry for the confusion caused by me sending revisions as
> > replies.
> > I've now addresses the points raised. As I'm unfamiliar with
> > mailing
> > lists
> > any recommendation on making the process more seamless is welcome.
> > 
> > Thank you for your time!
> > 
> 
> For the series
> 
> Acked-by: Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>
> 
> 
> > v2:
> > - Patch 1/4:
> >   - Remove unnecessary comments.
> >   - Change return type of functions to bool. (introduced an error,
> > fixed in v4)
> >   - Swallows return value of a function. (fixed in v4)
> > - Patch 2/4:
> >   - Create this 'noop' patch that just adds the LISS sensors to the
> > custom
> >     sensor match table.
> > - Patch 3/4:
> >   - Remove some unnecessary newlines in function calls.
> > - Patch 4/4:
> >   - Allow for 1 byte human presence reports.
> > 
> > v3:
> > - Patch 2/4
> >   - Add missing 'Signed-Off-By'
> > 
> > v4:
> > - Patch 1/4:
> >   - Fix return value and error codes on property query.
> >   - Document and ignore return values for queries of optionally
> > matched
> >     properties.
> >   - Don't modify *known in _get_known, return error when not
> > matched.
> >   - Remove comment on newly added sensors from commit message.
> > - Patch 4/4:
> >   - Clean up switch statement.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Philipp Jungkamp
> > 
> > Philipp Jungkamp (4):
> >   HID: hid-sensor-custom: Allow more custom iio sensors
> >   HID: hid-sensor-custom: Add LISS custom sensors
> >   IIO: hid-sensor-als: Use generic usage
> >   IIO: hid-sensor-prox: Use generic usage
> > 
> >  drivers/hid/hid-sensor-custom.c     | 233 +++++++++++++++++++-----
> > ----
> >  drivers/iio/light/hid-sensor-als.c  |  27 ++--
> >  drivers/iio/light/hid-sensor-prox.c |  37 +++--
> >  include/linux/hid-sensor-ids.h      |   1 +
> >  4 files changed, 199 insertions(+), 99 deletions(-)
> > 
> > --
> > 2.38.1
> > 
> 
>
Jonathan Cameron Dec. 14, 2022, 9:27 a.m. UTC | #3
On Tue, 13 Dec 2022 23:51:50 +0100
Philipp Jungkamp <p.jungkamp@gmx.net> wrote:

> Hello,
> 
> Is there something I still need to do for this to be merged in the next
> merge window?
> 
> I don't quite understand what would happen next. I'm curious and hope I
> don't bother in the busy times when approaching a merge window.
Given most of this is in HID, up to Jiri to pick it up when happy with it.

Has all the other responses I think it needs.  You are absolutely correct
to ping it given it's been a few weeks.

Jonathan
> 
> Regards,
> Philipp Jungkamp
> 
> On Sun, 2022-11-27 at 09:33 -0800, srinivas pandruvada wrote:
> > On Fri, 2022-11-25 at 00:38 +0100, Philipp Jungkamp wrote:  
> > > Hello,
> > > 
> > > I'm sorry for the confusion caused by me sending revisions as
> > > replies.
> > > I've now addresses the points raised. As I'm unfamiliar with
> > > mailing
> > > lists
> > > any recommendation on making the process more seamless is welcome.
> > > 
> > > Thank you for your time!
> > >   
> > 
> > For the series
> > 
> > Acked-by: Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@linux.intel.com>
> > 
> >   
> > > v2:
> > > - Patch 1/4:
> > >   - Remove unnecessary comments.
> > >   - Change return type of functions to bool. (introduced an error,
> > > fixed in v4)
> > >   - Swallows return value of a function. (fixed in v4)
> > > - Patch 2/4:
> > >   - Create this 'noop' patch that just adds the LISS sensors to the
> > > custom
> > >     sensor match table.
> > > - Patch 3/4:
> > >   - Remove some unnecessary newlines in function calls.
> > > - Patch 4/4:
> > >   - Allow for 1 byte human presence reports.
> > > 
> > > v3:
> > > - Patch 2/4
> > >   - Add missing 'Signed-Off-By'
> > > 
> > > v4:
> > > - Patch 1/4:
> > >   - Fix return value and error codes on property query.
> > >   - Document and ignore return values for queries of optionally
> > > matched
> > >     properties.
> > >   - Don't modify *known in _get_known, return error when not
> > > matched.
> > >   - Remove comment on newly added sensors from commit message.
> > > - Patch 4/4:
> > >   - Clean up switch statement.
> > > 
> > > Regards,
> > > Philipp Jungkamp
> > > 
> > > Philipp Jungkamp (4):
> > >   HID: hid-sensor-custom: Allow more custom iio sensors
> > >   HID: hid-sensor-custom: Add LISS custom sensors
> > >   IIO: hid-sensor-als: Use generic usage
> > >   IIO: hid-sensor-prox: Use generic usage
> > > 
> > >  drivers/hid/hid-sensor-custom.c     | 233 +++++++++++++++++++-----
> > > ----
> > >  drivers/iio/light/hid-sensor-als.c  |  27 ++--
> > >  drivers/iio/light/hid-sensor-prox.c |  37 +++--
> > >  include/linux/hid-sensor-ids.h      |   1 +
> > >  4 files changed, 199 insertions(+), 99 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > --
> > > 2.38.1
> > >   
> > 
> >   
>
Jiri Kosina Dec. 14, 2022, 5:20 p.m. UTC | #4
On Tue, 13 Dec 2022, Philipp Jungkamp wrote:

> Is there something I still need to do for this to be merged in the next
> merge window?
> 
> I don't quite understand what would happen next. I'm curious and hope I
> don't bother in the busy times when approaching a merge window.

Unless Jonathan prefers to take this through iio.git for some reason, I'll 
pick it up into hid.git for 6.3 once 6.2 merge window is over.

Thanks,
Jonathan Cameron Dec. 15, 2022, 4:21 p.m. UTC | #5
On Wed, 14 Dec 2022 18:20:10 +0100 (CET)
Jiri Kosina <jikos@kernel.org> wrote:

> On Tue, 13 Dec 2022, Philipp Jungkamp wrote:
> 
> > Is there something I still need to do for this to be merged in the next
> > merge window?
> > 
> > I don't quite understand what would happen next. I'm curious and hope I
> > don't bother in the busy times when approaching a merge window.  
> 
> Unless Jonathan prefers to take this through iio.git for some reason, I'll 
> pick it up into hid.git for 6.3 once 6.2 merge window is over.

Probably more sensible if you pick it up through hid.git given the balance of changes.

If you can make an immutable branch even better on the off chance anything else
comes up that hits few lines changed in the IIO drivers.  I'd only pull that
into IIO if we needed to though (and I would be surprised if we do!)

Jonathan

> 
> Thanks,
>
Jiri Kosina Dec. 20, 2022, 2:26 p.m. UTC | #6
On Thu, 15 Dec 2022, Jonathan Cameron wrote:

> Probably more sensible if you pick it up through hid.git given the 
> balance of changes.
> 
> If you can make an immutable branch even better on the off chance anything else
> comes up that hits few lines changed in the IIO drivers.  I'd only pull that
> into IIO if we needed to though (and I would be surprised if we do!)

This is now in hid.git#for-6.3/hid-sensor and we can branch an immutable 
branch off it if needed (and if there are any hid-sensor patches coming on 
top later).

Thanks,