Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:1;
Message-ID: <6348ae7e-21f3-51ef-e60a-b3ceccc38be4@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 12 Oct 2023 15:56:52 +0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.15.1
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] watchdog: eiois200_wdt: Add EIO-IS200 Watchdog Driver
To:     Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Cc:     wenkai.chung@advantech.com.tw, Susi.Driver@advantech.com,
        Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@linux-watchdog.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org
References: <cover.1696495372.git.advantech.susiteam@gmail.com>
 <d7df3c7b-730a-4d09-8f15-3cc8591c8092@roeck-us.net>
 <b08d6cf6-cd48-86d7-a959-290fc4de092c@gmail.com>
 <ce810ce8-f93c-4a9c-9d14-1e8f8f8c3e2b@roeck-us.net>
 <88ffe7b3-fa62-e879-b9d6-6e229cfdab7d@gmail.com>
 <655945a4-fc45-4d01-954b-88aa6fb7231f@roeck-us.net>
Content-Language: en-US
From:   Wenkai <advantech.susiteam@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <655945a4-fc45-4d01-954b-88aa6fb7231f@roeck-us.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

Guenter Roeck 於 10/11/2023 11:05 PM 寫道:
> On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 12:08:57PM +0800, Wenkai wrote:
>> I understand that the patches don't meet the expected quality standards.
>> The compile issue is due to my MFD core driver, which is currently under
>> review and has not been merged yet.
>>
>> I would also like to seek your advice on how to best proceed with the
>> sub-drivers like the watchdog driver. Should I wait for my core MFD
>> driver to be successfully merged before submitting the sub-drivers, or
>> let Jones Lee review my core MFD driver and all its sub-drivers, or is
>> there another approach that you recommend?
> If the sub-drivers depend on the mfd driver, at least provide a reference
> to the patch or patch series introducing that driver. Either case, a direct
> include from "../mfd" is simply unacceptable. include/linux/mfd/ does exist
> for a reason, after all.

The LKML link is https://lkml.org/lkml/2023/9/6/1245. Is this link to 
the patch
sufficient?

And, I'll move the "eiois200.h" to "include/linux/mfd/".

> I don't know the best solution for reviewing all the drivers. I didn't
> (and do not plan to) look into the driver-driver API. If the interface
> is regmap, reviewing sub-drivers on their own should be straightforward.
> If the API is with function calls, things get more complicated because
> the API needs the sub-drivers to be tested and everything needs to be
> reviewed together.
>
> Guenter

Unfortunately, all sub-drivers mostly communicate with the EC firmware
through the MFD core driver's driver-driver API, only a few uses regmap.
So should the MFD core driver and its sub-drivers be reviewed by the same
maintainers?

Best regards,
Wenkai