On Thu, Feb 01, 2024 at 07:54:24PM +0530, Ravi Gunasekaran wrote:

...

Thanks for taking time to review the patches.

The primary intention of this series was to know if the RPMsg based approach
would be upstream friendly or not. But I would not like to use that as an excuse
for not fixing checks/warnings/errors reported by checkpatch completely.
Even though if its RFC, I will treat it as an actual upstream patch  and address the
checkpatch/smatch/sparse findings or atleast mention in the cover letter that the
findings have not been fully addressed.

Understood. TBH, I am unsure of the value of this kind of review for an RFC
- I understand it is important to get the bigger picture questions out of
the way at this point.

...