On Wed, 03 Jul 2024 09:10:58 +0200
Nuno Sá [off-list ref] wrote:

On Tue, 2024-07-02 at 21:26 +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:

quoted

On Tue, 02 Jul 2024 18:02:32 +0200
Nuno Sa via B4 Relay [off-list ref] wrote:
  

quoted

Hi Jonathan,

Here it goes the first round of what we discussed in [1] about
annotating .masklength as __private. Patches should be fairly simple so
hopefully I did not messed up much...

Note that in core, there's one place where we're still directly writing
into .masklength (when it's effectively set). The plan is then to
directly use ACCESS_PRIVATE() in there in the same patch where we mark
.masklength as __private.  

Makes sense. Series looks good to me, but I'll not pick it up just yet.
I've tagged a like second 6.11 pull request, so this is probably 6.12 material
unless things go particularly smoothly and Greg takes an additional last
minute one as there is one set waiting for a fix that is in char-misc
but not yet iio-togreg.

Jonathan
  

Yeah, looks sane to me. Advantage of going in 6.12 is that (likely) we'' get all
the conversions done.

Given I'm not planning to send another pull request (no time for suitable
testing in linux-next etc) for 6.11 I've started queuing up as probable
6.12 material.

Usual process applies at this stage - I won't be pushing out as togreg
until I can rebase on rc1.

Applied and pushed out as testing for now with the typo Alexandru
pointed out in adxl372 fixed up.

Jonathan

- Nuno Sá

quoted