Hi Arend, >>>>> Since commit 3c47d19ff4dc ("drivers: base: add coredump driver ops") >>>>> it is possible to initiate a device coredump from user-space. This >>>>> patch adds support for it adding the .coredump() driver callback. >>>>> As there is no longer a need to initiate it through debugfs remove >>>>> that code. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspr...@broadcom.com> >>>> >>>> Based on the discussion I assume this is ok to take to w-d-next. If that's >>>> not >>>> the case, please let me know ASAP. >>> >>> It is up to the mwifiex maintainers to decide, I guess. The ABI >>> documentation need to be revised and change the callback to void >>> return type. I am not sure what the best approach is. 1) apply this >>> and fix return type later, or 2) fix return type and resubmit this. >>> What is your opinion? >> >> I guess the callback change will go through Greg's tree? Then I suspect >> it's easier that you submit the callback change to Greg first and wait >> for it to trickle down to wireless-drivers-next (after the next merge >> window) and then I can apply the driver patches. Otherwise there might >> be a conflict between my and Greg's tree. > > That was my assessment, but unfortunately Marcel already applied the btmrvl > patch before I could reply. So how do I move from here? Option 1) revert > brmrvl and fix callback return type, or 2) apply mwifiex patch and fix > callback return type later for both drivers.
I can take the patch back out of bluetooth-next if needed. It is your call. Regards Marcel