Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20200923090519.361-1-himadrispandya@gmail.com>
 <20200923090519.361-4-himadrispandya@gmail.com> <1600856557.26851.6.camel@suse.com>
 <CAOY-YVkHycXqem_Xr6nQLgKEunk3MNc7dBtZ=5Aym4Y06vs9xQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <1600870858.25088.1.camel@suse.com> <CAOY-YVkciMUgtS7USbBh_Uy_=fVWwMMDeHv=Ub_H3GaY0FKZyQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <7f9e20b2eab783303c4e5f5c3244366fa88a6567.camel@suse.com>
In-Reply-To: <7f9e20b2eab783303c4e5f5c3244366fa88a6567.camel@suse.com>
From:   Himadri Pandya <himadrispandya@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 25 Sep 2020 16:53:48 +0530
Message-ID: <CAOY-YVmBW52bXF95pTM3fNVUyRt=PNXZ5iGyq6mYsW2_iopnoQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] net: usb: rtl8150: use usb_control_msg_recv() and usb_control_msg_send()
To:     Oliver Neukum <oneukum@suse.com>
Cc:     David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        pankaj.laxminarayan.bharadiya@intel.com,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>, yuehaibing@huawei.com,
        petkan@nucleusys.com, ogiannou@gmail.com,
        USB list <linux-usb@vger.kernel.org>,
        netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linuxfoundation.org,
        Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 5:06 PM Oliver Neukum <oneukum@suse.com> wrote:
>
> Am Mittwoch, den 23.09.2020, 20:02 +0530 schrieb Himadri Pandya:
>
> > I meant that it was stupid to change it without properly understanding
> > the significance of GFP_NOIO in this context.
> >
> > So now, do we re-write the wrapper functions with flag passed as a parameter?
>
> Hi,
>
> I hope I set you in CC for a patch set doing exactly that.
>

Yes.

> Do not let me or other maintainers discourage you from writing patches.
> Look at it this way. Had you not written this patch, I would not have
> looked into the matter. Patches are supposed to be reviewed.
> If you want additional information, just ask. We do not want
> people discouraged from writing substantial patches.
>

Understood :).

I'll send v2 after the update in API is merged.

Thanks,
Himadri

>         Regards
>                 Oliver
>
>