linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 00/10] mux controller abstraction and iio/i2c muxes

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, 3 Mar 2017 19:44:46 +0100
From:   Peter Rosin <peda@...ntia.se>
To:     Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
CC:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
        Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@....de>,
        Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
        Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@...erw.net>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>, <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-iio@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 00/10] mux controller abstraction and iio/i2c muxes

On 2017-03-03 17:52, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> 
>> Jonathan, Wolfram, do you have any preferences on how this should be
>> coordinated regarding the new iio and i2c drivers (and iio changes)?
> 
> You got the acks, all is fine, I think.
> 
>> My plan is to at some point declare the branch immutable. Then both of
>> you can pull it in. Or? 
> 
> Yup, sounds good.
> 
>> But now that I think about it I wonder what the point is of having
>> Greg pull it in also? Sure, third time's a charm and all that, but...
> 
> AFAIU, Greg will be your "upstream", so he should definately pull the
> branch. I will just pull it in to avoid merge conflicts in my tree.
> Or did I misunderstand your question?

You got the gist of it. The piece I was missing was the conditional
pull into iio/i2c. If you only pull in order to resolve conflicts
it of course makes total sense, thanks.

And conflicts -- if they show up -- will probably be trivial given the
nature of the series. Famous last words...

Cheers,
peda