Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20220830100700.344594-1-sudeep.holla@arm.com> <20220830100700.344594-9-sudeep.holla@arm.com>
 <CAFA6WYPXsLt692eW3_tqy+=aLz7W-Ymh-RqZuqATeHpzGp8Tkw@mail.gmail.com> <20220831112652.brjnuygzkvcteadx@bogus>
In-Reply-To: <20220831112652.brjnuygzkvcteadx@bogus>
From:   Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@linaro.org>
Date:   Wed, 31 Aug 2022 16:59:36 +0530
Message-ID: <CAFA6WYP9UF8qLcBkWVdAOyb_EArDHX6ihPf_6GqbkoZYkdNrPQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/9] tee: optee: Drop ffa_ops in optee_ffa structure
To:     Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, op-tee@lists.trustedfirmware.org,
        Marc Bonnici <marc.bonnici@arm.com>,
        Valentin Laurent <valentin.laurent@trustonic.com>,
        Lukas Hanel <lukas.hanel@trustonic.com>,
        Coboy Chen <coboy.chen@mediatek.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, 31 Aug 2022 at 16:57, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 04:28:01PM +0530, Sumit Garg wrote:
> > On Tue, 30 Aug 2022 at 15:40, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Since the ffa_device itself carries ffa_dev_ops now, there is no need
> > > to keep a copy in optee_ffa structure.
> > >
> > > Drop ffa_ops in the optee_ffa structure as it is not needed anymore.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/tee/optee/ffa_abi.c       | 9 ++++-----
> > >  drivers/tee/optee/optee_private.h | 1 -
> > >  2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > >
> >
> > Is this patch doing anything different from patch #2? If not then I
> > think both should be squashed.
> >
>
> Indeed, I thought about squashing them and forgot before getting there.
> Does the review tag still apply for 2/9 after I squash this into it.
>

Yeah, feel free to apply my review tag.

-Sumit

> Thanks for the review.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Sudeep