Re: [PATCH] hwtracing: Switch back to struct platform_driver::remove()

[Suzuki K Poulose]

On 11/11/2024 14:47, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> Hi
>
> On 11/11/2024 14:12, Alexander Shishkin wrote:
> > Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> >
> > > After commit 0edb555a65d1 ("platform: Make platform_driver::remove()
> > > return void") .remove() is (again) the right callback to implement for
> > > platform drivers.
> > >
> > > Convert all platform drivers below drivers/hwtracing to use .remove(),
> > > with the eventual goal to drop struct platform_driver::remove_new(). As
> > > .remove() and .remove_new() have the same prototypes, conversion is done
> > > by just changing the structure member name in the driver initializer.
> > >
> > > Also adapt some whitespace to make indention consistent.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Acked-by: Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > > ---
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > I did a single patch for all of drivers/hwtracing. While I usually
> > > prefer to do one logical change per patch, this seems to be
> > > overengineering here as the individual changes are really trivial and
> > > shouldn't be much in the way for stable backports. But I'll happily
> > > split the patch if you prefer it split. Maybe split for coresight vs.
> > > intel_th? Also if you object the indentation stuff, I can rework that.
> >
> > I'm fine with it as is.
> >
> > > This is based on today's next, if conflicts arise when you apply it at
> > > some later time and don't want to resolve them, feel free to just drop
> > > the changes to the conflicting files. I'll notice and followup at a
> > > later time then. Or ask me for a fixed resend. (Having said that, I
> > > recommend b4 am -3 + git am -3 which should resolve most conflicts just
> > > fine.)
> >
> > Does anybody want to pick this up or should I? I'm fine either way, but
> > if there are any conflicts they won't be from my end of things, so it
> > might make sense to take it via the coresight path.
>
> I am happy to take them via coresight tree and queue them for v6.14


I see that Linus has queued this already

Suzuki


> Suzuki
>
> > Thanks,
> > --
> > Alex