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;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] Kconfig symbol fixes on powerpc
To:     Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
        Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
        Michael Neuling <mikey@neuling.org>,
        Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@arm.com>,
        kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Cc:     stable@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20210819113954.17515-1-lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com>
From:   Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
Message-ID: <2784c69e-898d-3a40-a0f7-b7769a57980b@csgroup.eu>
Date:   Thu, 19 Aug 2021 13:50:57 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.13.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20210819113954.17515-1-lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: fr
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk


Le 19/08/2021 à 13:39, Lukas Bulwahn a écrit :
> Dear powerpc maintainers,
> 
> The script ./scripts/checkkconfigsymbols.py warns on invalid references to
> Kconfig symbols (often, minor typos, name confusions or outdated references).
> 
> This patch series addresses all issues reported by
> ./scripts/checkkconfigsymbols.py in ./drivers/usb/ for Kconfig and Makefile
> files. Issues in the Kconfig and Makefile files indicate some shortcomings in
> the overall build definitions, and often are true actionable issues to address.
> 
> These issues can be identified and filtered by:
> 
>    ./scripts/checkkconfigsymbols.py | grep -E "arch/powerpc/.*(Kconfig|Makefile)" -B 1 -A 1
> 
> After applying this patch series on linux-next (next-20210817), the command
> above yields just two false positives (SHELL, r13) due to tool shortcomings.
> 
> As these two patches are fixes, please consider if they are suitable for
> backporting to stable.
> 
> v1 -> v2:
>    Followed Christophe Leroy's comment and drop the obsolete select.
> 


No need to change anything now, but as your two patches are completely independent, you could have 
submitted them separately. That would have avoided to resend both when changing the first one only.