Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.37 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.37;
Message-ID: <0b0bc38c2c76917e9a29e216d6ae7d265a919d07.camel@codeconstruct.com.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/10] ipmi: kcs_bmc: Make kcs_bmc_update_event_mask()
 static
From:   Andrew Jeffery <andrew@codeconstruct.com.au>
To:     Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@Huawei.com>
Cc:     minyard@acm.org, openipmi-developer@lists.sourceforge.net,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, aladyshev22@gmail.com,
        jk@codeconstruct.com.au
Date:   Mon, 06 Nov 2023 09:22:44 +1030
In-Reply-To: <20231103144026.00001fbc@Huawei.com>
References: <20231103061522.1268637-1-andrew@codeconstruct.com.au>
         <20231103061522.1268637-4-andrew@codeconstruct.com.au>
         <20231103144026.00001fbc@Huawei.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
User-Agent: Evolution 3.46.4-2 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, 2023-11-03 at 14:40 +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Fri,  3 Nov 2023 16:45:15 +1030
> Andrew Jeffery <andrew@codeconstruct.com.au> wrote:
>=20
> > There were no users outside the subsystem core, so let's not expose it.
> >=20
> > Signed-off-by: Andrew Jeffery <andrew@codeconstruct.com.au>
> Is it worth having the wrapper?

Perhaps not, though aesthetically I prefer it. Also the diff is at
least slightly smaller by not removing it entirely :)

>=20
> I guess all the other cases do have wrappers (even if that's because
> they continue to be exported) so fair enough.
>=20
> Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>

Thanks,

Andrew