Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] dax-device: Some cleanups

[Dan Williams]

On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 7:48 PM Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 2:29 PM Uwe Kleine-König <uwe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > I didn't get any feedback for the (implicit) v1 of this series that
> > started with Message-Id: 20210127230124.109522-1-uwe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
> > 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.