Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Sun, 1 Mar 2020 06:35:11 +0530
From:   afzal mohammed <afzal.mohd.ma@gmail.com>
To:     Finn Thain <fthain@telegraphics.com.au>
Cc:     linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Greg Ungerer <gerg@linux-m68k.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/18] m68k: Replace setup_irq() by request_irq()
Message-ID: <20200301010511.GA5195@afzalpc>
References: <cover.1582471508.git.afzal.mohd.ma@gmail.com>
 <00b0bf964278dd0bb3e093283994399ff796cca5.1582471508.git.afzal.mohd.ma@gmail.com>
 <20200229131553.GA4985@afzalpc>
 <alpine.LNX.2.22.394.2003010958170.8@nippy.intranet>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LNX.2.22.394.2003010958170.8@nippy.intranet>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.3 (2018-01-21)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi,

On Sun, Mar 01, 2020 at 10:11:51AM +1100, Finn Thain wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Feb 2020, afzal mohammed wrote:

> > [...] 
> > Specific to m68k, following changes has been made based on m68 family
> > ;) feedback,
> > 
> 
> None of my comments were specific to any architecture.

One thing i had in my background, but realize now that didn't express
anywhere in my mails, in essence what Geert mentioned, i.e. being
legacy code, i did not give a treatment that would have been given to
adding new code.

But m68k subthread has been a very lively one and as not many changes,
felt it was not fair from my side not to handle almost as though it is
a new code addition.

There has been conflicting opinions, so i had to take a call one way
or other, including one against what i did not feel natural, mentioned
below, please let me know if further changes are required.

> > 3. s/pr_err/pr_debug
> 
> Please just ignore my opinion on that, since it contradicts the 
> maintainer's guidance/preference.

Yes, i will be remove this change.

Regards
afzal