linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 00/21] net-next: stmmac: add dwmac-sun8i ethernet driver

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: <20170602.102205.701672574727845689.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:   Fri, 02 Jun 2017 10:22:05 -0400 (EDT)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com
Cc:     clabbe.montjoie@...il.com, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        mark.rutland@....com, wens@...e.org, linux@...linux.org.uk,
        catalin.marinas@....com, will.deacon@....com,
        peppe.cavallaro@...com, alexandre.torgue@...com,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-sunxi@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 00/21] net-next: stmmac: add dwmac-sun8i ethernet
 driver

From: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2017 11:13:20 +0200

> On Fri, Jun 02, 2017 at 08:37:52AM +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 01, 2017 at 02:58:19PM -0400, David Miller wrote:
>> > From: Corentin Labbe <clabbe.montjoie@...il.com>
>> > Date: Wed, 31 May 2017 09:18:31 +0200
>> > 
>> > > This patch series add the driver for dwmac-sun8i which handle the Ethernet MAC
>> > > present on Allwinner H3/H5/A83T/A64 SoCs.
>> > 
>> > Series applied, but wow that's a lot of DT file changes :-(
>> 
>> The DT patches should not go through your tree, but arm-soc, so I
>> guess this is not an issue for you?
> 
> Ok, so I saw that you actually merged them. Can you revert or drop
> that merge for the DT part?
> 
> This will generate a lot of conflicts with our tree, and I'm not sure
> this would be efficient to make you take all the entirely unrelated to
> next patches.

Please tell me which specific changes to revert.

Thank you.