Hi Lee.
On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 03:39:41PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Fri, 03 Jul 2020, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
>
> > Improve the documentation for backlight_device and
> > adapt it to kernel-doc style.
> >
> > The updated documentation is more strict on how locking is used.
> > With the update neither update_lock nor ops_lock may be used
> > outside the backlight core.
> > This restriction was introduced to keep the locking simple
> > by keeping it in the core.
> > It was verified that this documents the current state by renaming
> > update_lock => bl_update_lock and ops_lock => bl_ops_lock.
> > The rename did not reveal any uses outside the backlight core.
> > The rename is NOT part of this patch.
> >
> > v3:
> > - Update changelog to explain locking details (Daniel)
> >
> > v2:
> > - Add short intro to all fields (Daniel)
> > - Updated description of update_lock (Daniel)
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sam Ravnborg <s...@ravnborg.org>
> > Reviewed-by: Emil Velikov <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com>
> > Cc: Lee Jones <lee.jo...@linaro.org>
> > Cc: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thomp...@linaro.org>
> > Cc: Jingoo Han <jingooh...@gmail.com>
> > ---
> > include/linux/backlight.h | 72 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
> > 1 file changed, 49 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
>
> Some of these do not apply cleanly.
>
> Please collect the *-bys already received, rebase and resubmit.
Will do.
The patch-set is based on drm-misc-next. Are there another
tree that I should use?
Sam
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
