On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 7:48 PM Dan Williams <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 2:29 PM Uwe Kleine-König <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > I didn't get any feedback for the (implicit) v1 of this series that > > started with Message-Id: [email protected], > > but I identified a few improvements myself: > > > > - Use "dax-device" consistently as a prefix > > - Instead of requiring a .remove callback, make it explicitly > > optional. (Drop checking for .remove from former patch 1, introduce > > new patch "Properly handle drivers without remove callback") > > - The new patch about remove being optional allows to simplify one of > > the two dax drivers which is implemented in patch 4 > > - Patch 5 got a bit smaller because we now have one driver less with a > > remove callback. > > - Added Andrew to To: as he merged dax drivers in the past. > > > > Andrew: Assuming you consider these patches useful, would you please > > care for merging them? > > I've routed device-dax patches through Andrew when they had core-mm > entanglements, but a pure device-dax series like this I can take > through my tree. > > One small comment on patch5, otherwise looks good.
I take it back, patch5 looks good. I was going to ask about the return value removal for dax_bus_remove(), but that would need struct bus_type to change prototypes. All merged to the nvdimm tree. _______________________________________________ Linux-nvdimm mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
