linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 0/7] enable support for AMBA drivers under x86

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]

Message-ID: <CACxGe6v97ZnJpggcSE2HEE0S7wZFrYgFW0Hmok7D9h8ByufqGg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 13 Dec 2012 01:10:32 +0000
From:	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	Davide Ciminaghi <ciminaghi@...dd.com>,
	Jaswinder Singh <jaswinder.singh@...aro.org>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Dan Williams <djbw@...com>,
	"Koul, Vinod" <vinod.koul@...el.com>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	rubini <rubini@...dd.com>, Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ana.be>,
	Chris Ball <cjb@...top.org>,
	David Brown <davidb@...eaurora.org>,
	Nicolas Pitre <nico@...xnic.net>,
	Ben Dooks <ben-linux@...ff.org>,
	Viresh Kumar <viresh.linux@...il.com>,
	"rajeev-dlh.kumar" <rajeev-dlh.kumar@...com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"giancarlo.asnaghi" <giancarlo.asnaghi@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/7] enable support for AMBA drivers under x86

On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 12:37 AM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com> wrote:
> OK, so I'm not 100% sure how to best handle this patchset.  I can carry it
> in the x86 tree with the appropriate ACKs... which could lead to ugly merge
> conflicts, or we can ask the respective driver authors to take their bits...
> but that gives a sequencing problem (the core patchset depends on a bunch of
> outside trees in order to be tested.)
>
> Either way it is a late pull for 3.8 at best... however, the risk seems low
> so *maybe* that is acceptable.

I'd put the whole series into a separate branch by itself and any
subsystems with problematic conflicts can merge it into their trees
also. I'm fine with putting it in the x86 tree for v3.9. I don't think
there is any huge rush on it.

g.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/