Re: [PATCH] i2c: Use u8 type in i2c transfer calls

[Jason Gerecke]

On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 1:48 PM Andy Shevchenko
<andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 4:30 PM Jason Gerecke <killertofu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 20, 2022 at 12:01 PM Jason Gerecke <killertofu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 5:21 PM kernel test robot <rong.a.chen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > > Writing a patch to fix the new warnings generated by my I2C patch is
> > > simple enough, but I'd like some help coordinating getting both
> > > patches landed. Should I wait for the I2C patch to land in "for-next"
> > > before sending the IIO fix, or would it be preferred to send the IIO
> > > fix right now so that both patches can be reviewed simultaneously?
> >
> > It's been pretty quiet, so asking again for any thoughts on how to
> > best address this tangle...
>
> The rule of thumb is not to introduce an additional warning or compile error.
> I haven't looked deeply into this case, but it smells to me as if you need a new
> version of your initial patch that includes a fix to IIO.
>
>
> --
> With Best Regards,
> Andy Shevchenko

Thanks! Since the patch would touch both IIO and I2C I assume I would
submit it to both mailinglists. And that whichever maintainer gets to
it first would just give their Reviewed-by (if all looks good) and the
second applies the Signed-off-by and handles the merge?

I'll work on the updated combined patch...

Jason