Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 18 Jun 2020 14:09:13 +0100 | From | Mark Brown <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/5] regulator: Constify some static struct variables |
| |
On Thu, 18 Jun 2020 00:32:42 +0200, Rikard Falkeborn wrote: > Constify some static struct variables to allow the compiler to put them > in read-only memory. There are more of these, but I figured I could > start small. Also, is one patch per driver a good resolution or too > fine-grained? > > Rikard Falkeborn (5): > regulator: anatop: Constify anatop_core_rops > regulator: cpcap: Constify cpcap_regulator_ops > regulator: ltc3676: Constify ltc3676_regulators > regulator: max8907: Constify static structs > regulator: max8997: Constify struct regulator_ops > > [...]
Applied to
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/regulator.git for-next
Thanks!
[1/5] regulator: anatop: Constify anatop_core_rops commit: cae62a937912bd4b3faf8e268cc0ffcf00ec5850 [2/5] regulator: cpcap: Constify cpcap_regulator_ops commit: bcf39c1eb1e059ec612bf06f4aa7b3972dcc85e8 [3/5] regulator: ltc3676: Constify ltc3676_regulators commit: b37f076d4bfdd29b3aa497480b226759f659e25f [4/5] regulator: max8907: Constify static structs commit: b08af72d6e5319e96527816c4b3b08d0b1a6f242 [5/5] regulator: max8997: Constify struct regulator_ops commit: 9ed84d24de480e81294e00814c142234bc17ce0c
All being well this means that it will be integrated into the linux-next tree (usually sometime in the next 24 hours) and sent to Linus during the next merge window (or sooner if it is a bug fix), however if problems are discovered then the patch may be dropped or reverted.
You may get further e-mails resulting from automated or manual testing and review of the tree, please engage with people reporting problems and send followup patches addressing any issues that are reported if needed.
If any updates are required or you are submitting further changes they should be sent as incremental updates against current git, existing patches will not be replaced.
Please add any relevant lists and maintainers to the CCs when replying to this mail.
Thanks, Mark
| |