linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 0/3] spi-nor: Add support for Intel SPI serial flash controller

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 9 Dec 2016 14:15:53 +0100
From:   Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@...il.com>
To:     Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
        Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc:     Cyrille Pitchen <cyrille.pitchen@...el.com>,
        Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>,
        Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
        Peter Tyser <ptyser@...-inc.com>, key.seong.lim@...el.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/3] spi-nor: Add support for Intel SPI serial flash
 controller

On 12/09/2016 01:25 PM, Mika Westerberg wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 09, 2016 at 08:57:53AM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
>> On Wed, 07 Dec 2016, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>
>>> On 12/07/2016 09:53 AM, Mika Westerberg wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 09:45:25AM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
>>>>> I'm happy either way.  However if you take them, I will require a
>>>>> pull-request to an immutable branch containing only these patches.
>>>>>
>>>>> If I take them, it won't be until v4.11, since we are half way though
>>>>> -rc8 already and I would like them to soak in -next for at least a
>>>>> couple of weeks.
>>>>
>>>> This series already missed v4.8 and v4.9 so I don't think there is a
>>>> rush to get it for v4.10 either ;-) I'm fine if it goes for v4.11.
>>>
>>> Hmmmmmmmmmmm, that kinda sucks. Lee, are you positive this isn't 4.10
>>> material ?
>>
>> The merge-window opens in 2 days.
>>
>> As I mentioned, I like patches to reside in -next for at least 1 maybe
>> 2 RC cycles before merging.  It's far to easy to accept code, then get
>> bitten if/when it breaks after being merged by Linus.
> 
> I agree. Better to give it some time in linux-next.
> 
> Can you queue this series for v4.11?

OK, I'm fine with this.

-- 
Best regards,
Marek Vasut