linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] gpiolib: Introduce gpio_device_get() and gpio_device

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: <CACRpkdYGP4GCHoo_wss4to9Mx-koakh_D9Z0NX+2m0X-o31dpw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 3 Dec 2022 23:19:59 +0100
From:   Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] gpiolib: Introduce gpio_device_get() and gpio_device_put()

On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 3:47 PM Andy Shevchenko
<andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:

> In PDx86 subsystem we decided to cherry-pick the fixes into for-next.
> Some other subsystems are doing back-merges (but I remember that Linus
> T. complained about back merges, although I dunno if it's still
> the case). Some subsystems merges their fixes into for-next, dunno
> if it's the best practice either.

I usually (A) let it conflict (Torvalds will solve) if it is small and
Rothwell fixed it up in next (B) back-merge some -rcN if is is big
and annoying or as last resort (C) apply the patch to for-next
(git will cope, but not elegant).

Yours,
Linus Walleij