Re: [PATCH v3] power: supply: test-power: implement charge_behaviour property

[Thomas Weißschuh]

Hi,

On 2024-03-27 14:34:00+0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
> On 3/27/24 2:25 PM, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> > Hello Hans,
> > 
> > On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 11:44:41AM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
> >> On 3/27/24 11:36 AM, Hans de Goede wrote:
> >>> On 3/26/24 8:50 PM, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> >>>> On Wed, 06 Mar 2024 20:37:04 +0100, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> >>>>> To validate the special formatting of the "charge_behaviour" sysfs
> >>>>> property add it to the example driver.
> >>>>
> >>>> Applied, thanks!
> >>>>
> >>>> [1/1] power: supply: test-power: implement charge_behaviour property
> >>>>       commit: 070c1470ae24317e7b19bd3882b300b6d69922a4
> >>>
> >>> Does this mean that you've also applied patches 1-3 of:
> >>> "[PATCH v2 0/4] power: supply: core: align charge_behaviour format with docs" ?
> >>>
> >>> Because this is a new version of 4/4 of that series and I think
> >>> that the new test may depend on the fixes from patches 1-3
> >>> of that series (which I'm reviewing now).
> >>
> >> Ok, I have some not entirely trivial comments on patch 3/4 of that series.
> >> I guess you (Sebastian) could address those while merging, or wait for
> >> a v3 of the series.
> > 
> > I can't. Patches 1-3 are already in 6.9-rc1. It looks you did not
> > get my replies, but they certainly have been captured by lore and
> > obviously Thomas got them since he send a v3 with just the last
> > patch:
> > 
> > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240303-power_supply-charge_behaviour_prop-v2-0-8ebb0a7c2409@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> > 
> > Anyways, I think your suggestions for further simplifications in
> > patch 3 are sensible. They just require doing an extra patch now
> > instead of being squashed.
> 
> Ah I see that is fine too :)
> 
> Thomas, can you do a follow-up patch with the simplifications
> which I suggested in my review of patch v2 3/4 ?

Will do!


Thomas