linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 0/2] J-Core timer support

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:   Thu, 20 Oct 2016 20:07:12 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
cc:     Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-sh@...r.kernel.org, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 0/2] J-Core timer support

On Thu, 20 Oct 2016, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Daniel,
> 
> On Thu, 20 Oct 2016, Rich Felker wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 09:32:40AM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> > > Unfortunately it won't happen. v4.9-rc1 is already out. The driver will be
> > > in v4.10.
> > > 
> > > If you wanted patches merged for v4.9, they should have been merged in the
> > > downstream tree before v4.8-rc5, so they hit the upstream tree for v4.9's merge
> > > window.
> > 
> > I've been trying to get what's essentially the same patch merged since
> > before the 4.8 merge window. I would be more understanding if this
> > were something new that's not upstream, but broken support for the
> > hardware (that, from a user perspective, is a bug, since they can
> > select the target but then it doesn't boot) has already been in one
> > release due to missing core drivers, and the irq patches have already
> > been merged in this release (post-rc1 even).
> 
> It's hardware enablement and not a new feature, so it's fine to merge it
> now. I'll pick it up later tonight.

Daniel, it's the top two commits in your 4.10 branch. So it's not a big
deal to zap them.

Thanks,

	tglx