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;
Date:   Mon, 16 Aug 2021 17:01:02 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To:     Alex Elder <elder@ieee.org>
Cc:     "Fabio M. De Francesco" <fmdefrancesco@gmail.com>,
        Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>, Alex Elder <elder@kernel.org>,
        greybus-dev@lists.linaro.org, linux-staging@lists.linux.dev,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] staging: greybus: Convert uart.c from IDR to XArray
Message-ID: <YRp9rnCardsCukju@kroah.com>
References: <20210814181130.21383-1-fmdefrancesco@gmail.com>
 <5541b638-db1e-26f2-2682-81f35504c9a3@ieee.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <5541b638-db1e-26f2-2682-81f35504c9a3@ieee.org>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 09:46:08AM -0500, Alex Elder wrote:
> On 8/14/21 1:11 PM, Fabio M. De Francesco wrote:
> > Convert greybus/uart.c from IDR to XArray. The abstract data type XArray
> > is more memory-efficient, parallelisable, and cache friendly. It takes
> > advantage of RCU to perform lookups without locking. Furthermore, IDR is
> > deprecated because XArray has a better (cleaner and more consistent) API.
> 
> I haven't verified the use of the new API (yet) but I have a few
> comments on your patch, below.
> 
> 					-Alex
> 
> > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Fabio M. De Francesco <fmdefrancesco@gmail.com>
> 
> I'm not sure I'm right about this...  But the actual change you're
> making has nothing to do with what the Intel test robot reported.
> I personally find the "Reported-by" here a little misleading, but
> maybe the "Link" line that gets added will provide explanation.
> 
> Anyway, unless someone else contradicts/corrects me, I'd rather
> not have the "Reported-by" here (despite wanting to provide much
> credit to <lkp@intel.com>...).

You are correct, "Reported-by:" does not make sense here.

thanks,

greg k-h