Danilo Krummrich
2025-Oct-20 23:44 UTC
[PATCH v7.1 0/4] bitfield initial refactor within nova-core (RESEND)
On 10/18/25 3:41 PM, Alexandre Courbot wrote:> On Fri Oct 17, 2025 at 12:13 AM JST, Joel Fernandes wrote: >> (Resending due to some commit message mistakes (missing SOB etc). Thanks!). >> >> These patches implement the initial refactoring and few improvements to the >> register and bitfield macros. Rebased on drm-rust-next. >> >> Main difference from the previous series [1] is dropped the moving out of >> nova-core pending BoundedInt changes: >> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20251003154748.1687160-1-joelagnelf at nvidia.com/ >> Other than that, added tags, resolved conflict with kernel::fmt changes and >> rebased on drm-rust-next. > > Thanks, this version is looking pretty good, and works as intended. > > I plan on pushing these 4 patches soonish after fixing the line length > issues and the other few problems reported by checkpatch. > > Danilo, please let me know if you think this is premature, but imho it > is good to set this part in stone to avoid merge conflicts with future > patches that will want to modify the register macro.SGTM, we can keep discussing the hi:lo ascending / descending topic for nova-core independently. However, for the sample code that, eventually, we'll move out of nova-core, we should stick to what's common. With that, Acked-by: Danilo Krummrich <dakr at kernel.org>
Alexandre Courbot
2025-Oct-21 13:46 UTC
[PATCH v7.1 0/4] bitfield initial refactor within nova-core (RESEND)
On Tue Oct 21, 2025 at 8:44 AM JST, Danilo Krummrich wrote:> On 10/18/25 3:41 PM, Alexandre Courbot wrote: >> On Fri Oct 17, 2025 at 12:13 AM JST, Joel Fernandes wrote: >>> (Resending due to some commit message mistakes (missing SOB etc). Thanks!). >>> >>> These patches implement the initial refactoring and few improvements to the >>> register and bitfield macros. Rebased on drm-rust-next. >>> >>> Main difference from the previous series [1] is dropped the moving out of >>> nova-core pending BoundedInt changes: >>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20251003154748.1687160-1-joelagnelf at nvidia.com/ >>> Other than that, added tags, resolved conflict with kernel::fmt changes and >>> rebased on drm-rust-next. >> >> Thanks, this version is looking pretty good, and works as intended. >> >> I plan on pushing these 4 patches soonish after fixing the line length >> issues and the other few problems reported by checkpatch. >> >> Danilo, please let me know if you think this is premature, but imho it >> is good to set this part in stone to avoid merge conflicts with future >> patches that will want to modify the register macro. > > SGTM, we can keep discussing the hi:lo ascending / descending topic for > nova-core independently. > > However, for the sample code that, eventually, we'll move out of nova-core, we > should stick to what's common. > > With that, > > Acked-by: Danilo Krummrich <dakr at kernel.org>Pushed to drm-rust-next after fixing the checkpatch errors and reordering the sample code in descending order. ... and as dim was pushing, I noticed I forgot to add your Acked-by. >_< Apologies for that.