linux-kernel - Re: [PULL REQUEST] i2c for v5.8

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20200725144603.GA4013@kunai>
Date:   Sat, 25 Jul 2020 16:46:03 +0200
From:   Wolfram Sang <wsa@...nel.org>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc:     linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Peter Rosin <peda@...ntia.se>,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
Subject: Re: [PULL REQUEST] i2c for v5.8

Linus,

> Do you have a lot of pending fixes? Because things _seem_ fairly quiet
> for this release, and right now it doesn't seem to make much sense to
> delay 5.8.

No, it is not about fixes. I have one fix pending and I am quite sure we
make it for 5.8.

It would simply give me one more week to get some not-so-complex I2C
driver updates into 5.9 which I couldn't apply before because of my
holidays. With the next merge window this soon, I can now choose to let
people wait 3 more months or to put some stress on my side (bye bye
holiday relaxation).

So, I wondered if maybe more maintainers would be in a similar siuation
and we could get an extra week to catch up (I know this is not a
technical reason).

Anyhow, given your response, this seems not the case.

Kind regards,

   Wolfram

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