[PATCH v1 0/2] Add missing fixes in fastrpc_get_args

[Dmitry Baryshkov]

On Mon, Dec 30, 2024 at 08:32:30PM +0000, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote:
> 
> 
> On 30/12/2024 18:22, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 30, 2024 at 04:15:42PM +0000, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote:
> > > 
> > > On Wed, 18 Dec 2024 15:54:27 +0530, Ekansh Gupta wrote:
> > > > This patch series adds the listed bug fixes that have been missing
> > > > in upstream fastRPC driver:
> > > > - Page address for registered buffer(with fd) is not calculated
> > > >    properly.
> > > > - Page size calculation for non-registered buffer(copy buffer) is
> > > >    incorrect.
> > > > 
> > > > [...]
> > > 
> > > Applied, thanks!
> > 
> > May I ask, why they are being accepted with the obvious checkpatch
> > warnings?
> 
> If you are referring to this warning.
> WARNING: Invalid email format for stable: 'stable <stable at kernel.org>',
> prefer 'stable at kernel.org'
> 
> I tend to fix such small warnings before applying. These are fixed now.
> 
> > 
> > What kind of process is being followed, as those patches had review
> > comments to be implemented in the next iteration.
> 
> I apply these patches if it looks good to me. This also helps with getting
> it tested from wider audience via linux-next.
> 
> I do run TFLite workloads before it ends up in char-misc, but not for every
> patch.
> 
> sorry If I missed any blocker comments, but your comments were more on the
> cover letter content and asking about the work loads which triggers these
> bugs.
> 
> Are these patches breaking any of your test-cases?

No. But info about work-loads is the most important part: it makes sure
that none of the developers miss similar issue next time.

-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry