linux-kernel - Re: [net-next PATCH] net: dsa: qca8k: move driver to qca dir

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: <62d1c288.1c69fb81.45988.55fe@mx.google.com>
Date:   Fri, 15 Jul 2022 21:16:46 +0200
From:   Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@...il.com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH] net: dsa: qca8k: move driver to qca dir

On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 12:37:43PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Jul 2022 03:57:46 +0200 Christian Marangi wrote:
> > > Does the split mean that this code will move again?
> > > If so perhaps better to put this patch in the series 
> > > that does the split? We're ~2 weeks away from the merge 
> > > window so we don't want to end up moving the same code
> > > twice in two consecutive releases.  
> > 
> > What to you mean with "will move again"?
> >  
> > The code will be split to qca8k-common.c and qca8k-8xxx.c
> > And later qca8k-ipq4019.c will be proposed. 
> > 
> > So the files will all stay in qca/ dir.
> > 
> > Or should I just propose the move and the code split in one series?
> 
> Yup that's what I prefer.
>

Ok no problem, if the current merged commit is a problem, np for me with
a revert! (it was really to prevent sending a bigger series, sorry for
the mess)

> > Tell me what do you prefer.

-- 
	Ansuel