linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 00/12] gpio: Tight IRQ chip integration

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: <20171106143627.GA16836@ulmo>
Date:   Mon, 6 Nov 2017 15:36:27 +0100
From:   Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
To:     Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc:     Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com>,
        Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
        "linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org" <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 00/12] gpio: Tight IRQ chip integration

On Mon, Nov 06, 2017 at 02:22:22PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 4, 2017 at 12:50 AM, Grygorii Strashko
> <grygorii.strashko@...com> wrote:
> > On 11/03/2017 05:50 PM, Linus Walleij wrote:
> 
> >> I guess I will consider queueing them already for v4.15 if
> >> Torvalds churns out another -rc on sunday, I do not
> >> doubt that you will finish it as we have discussed with banks and
> >> all. If v4.14 is released on sunday let's queue this early for v4.16.
> >
> > Can you see my reply?
> > https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/11/3/820
> 
> Yes so I was considering queueing patches 1-9 with your ACK so
> Thierry can get his patch stack down and focus on the add-on
> stuff at the end of the series.
> 
> Thierry, does it sound reasonable?

Sure. I'd still like to see Tegra186 support go into 4.15 to unblock a
bunch of things. Like I mentioned in my reply to Grygorii earlier, the
bigger part of the changes can be follow-on patches in my opinion since
they become only relevant as other drivers are converted.

I've been running with some changes proposed by Grygorii applied to my
local tree and can send they can all be squashed into patch 10 to at
least address most of Grygorii's comments. Should I send it as follow-
up or do you want me to resend a v7 of 10-12 with those changes squashed
in?

Thierry

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)