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;
Message-ID: <46bb773c-31a8-c57a-0cde-39c27d0a6e36@arm.com>
Date:   Wed, 31 May 2023 23:44:55 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:102.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.11.1
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] devres: Provide krealloc_array
To:     Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        James Clark <james.clark@arm.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        Coresight ML <coresight@lists.linaro.org>
References: <20230509094942.396150-1-james.clark@arm.com>
 <20230509094942.396150-2-james.clark@arm.com>
 <2023051340-sinuous-darkroom-2497@gregkh>
 <89ad5070-db72-7bf1-5d86-a89fea54e789@arm.com>
 <2023051530-immunize-pony-49ef@gregkh>
From:   Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
In-Reply-To: <2023051530-immunize-pony-49ef@gregkh>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

(Removed irrelevant recipients), +Cc: coresight ml

Hi Greg,

On 15/05/2023 12:55, Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, May 15, 2023 at 08:55:33AM +0100, James Clark wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 13/05/2023 12:04, Greg KH wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 09, 2023 at 10:49:38AM +0100, James Clark wrote:
>>>> There is no krealloc_array equivalent in devres. Users would have to
>>>> do their own multiplication overflow check so provide one.
>>>>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: James Clark <james.clark@arm.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>   Documentation/driver-api/driver-model/devres.rst |  1 +
>>>>   include/linux/device.h                           | 11 +++++++++++
>>>>   2 files changed, 12 insertions(+)

...

>> Maybe something could be done with some macro magic, but it would
>> probably end up being worse than just copying them and would affect the
>> real ones as well. So yeah I can't think of any easy gains either.
> 
> Ok, that's good.  Given a lack of objections from others, I'll just take
> this through my driver core tree in a few days.

Apologies for hijacking the thread. We have a series for CoreSight[1]
that depends on this series, which I see that, is queued in your
driver-core-next.

I would like to queue [1] for the next version (as there are other
work that depend on this, e.g., [2]). Do you have any 
recommendations/comments on the proposal ? Are you able to share a
stable branch which can be merged to coresight/next and queue the
series ontop ? (PS: I haven't queued anything for coresight/next yet).

Kind regards
Suzuki