[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <da9f985a-c935-8a01-3308-daaaddb723f5@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2020 13:13:33 +0200
From: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
To: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc: "David E. Box" <david.e.box@...ux.intel.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>, dvhart@...radead.org,
andy@...radead.org, bhelgaas@...gle.com,
alexey.budankov@...ux.intel.com,
Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>, rjw@...ysocki.net,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V8 1/5] PCI: Add defines for Designated Vendor-Specific
Extended Capability
Hi,
On 10/8/20 9:29 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Wed, 07 Oct 2020, Hans de Goede wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 10/7/20 8:54 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
>>> On Tue, 06 Oct 2020, David E. Box wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 2020-10-06 at 19:51 -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Oct 06, 2020 at 03:45:54PM -0700, David E. Box wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Bjorn,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This patch has been acked and unchanged for weeks. Is it possible
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> get this pulled into next? We have SIOV and CXL related work that
>>>>>> is
>>>>>> using these definitions. Thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>> I acked it because I expected you to merge it along with the rest of
>>>>> the series.
>>>>>
>>>>> I guess I could merge this patch via the PCI tree if you really want,
>>>>> but that ends up being a hassle because we have to worry about which
>>>>> order things get merged to Linus' tree. Better if the whole series
>>>>> is
>>>>> merged via the same tree.
>>>>
>>>> Agreed. The hope is that this series is ready for the next merge window
>>>> but no ack yet on V8. And if the series does not make it I'd like this
>>>> patch to at least get in.
>>>
>>> If Bjorn is happy to take this patch so late in the release cycle then
>>> please go ahead. The other patches are due for v5.11.
>>
>> I agree (that the other patches are for 5.11) talking about merging
>> this series patch 2 is a mfd patch and patches 3-5 are drivers/platform/x86
>> patches.
>>
>> Lee, FYI I'm taking over drivers/platform/x86 maintainership from Andy.
>
> Congratulations, Hans.
>
>> I suggest that we merge the entire series through a single tree
>> (with acks or reviewed-by-s from the other maintainer)
>> either through the mfd tree or through the drivers/platform/x86
>> tree. Since most changes are in drivers/platform/x86 the latter
>> probably makes more sense, but either way works for me.
>> So how would you like to proceed with this series ?
>
> I'm happy either way, but bear in mind that, due to the intrinsic
> heterogeneous nature of MFD, I already have infrastructure to easily
> apply (and send pull-requests for) cross-subsystem patch-sets.
Ok, you applying the entire series to the mfd tree is fine with me.
I'll try to review the entire series next week and then we'll see
from there.
Regards,
Hans
Powered by blists - more mailing lists