[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YuI6shUi6iJdMSfB@kroah.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2022 09:28:50 +0200
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, naresh.kamboju@...aro.org,
kernel-team@...roid.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/3] Bring back driver_deferred_probe_check_state()
for now
On Wed, Jul 27, 2022 at 11:50:08AM -0700, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> More fixes/changes are needed before driver_deferred_probe_check_state()
> can be deleted. So, bring it back for now.
>
> Greg,
>
> Can we get this into 5.19? If not, it might not be worth picking up this
> series. I could just do the other/more fixes in time for 5.20.
Wow, no, it is _WAY_ too late for 5.19 to make a change like this,
sorry.
What is so broken that we need to revert these now? I could do so for
5.20-rc1, and then backport to 5.19.y if that release is really broken,
but this feels odd so late in the cycle.
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists