[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20221228164711.GB256211@thinkpad>
Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2022 22:17:11 +0530
From: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: andersson@...nel.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, tony.luck@...el.com,
quic_saipraka@...cinc.com, konrad.dybcio@...aro.org,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
james.morse@....com, mchehab@...nel.org, rric@...nel.org,
linux-edac@...r.kernel.org, quic_ppareek@...cinc.com,
luca.weiss@...rphone.com, ahalaney@...hat.com, steev@...i.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 00/17] Qcom: LLCC/EDAC: Fix base address used for LLCC
banks
On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 11:36:06AM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 02:10:11PM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> > Patches 1/17, 2/17 and 3/17 can be merged independently to EDAC tree. Rest of
> > the patches should be merged to qcom tree due to LLCC dependency.
>
> Why make it more complicated than it has to be?
>
> How about I review the EDAC bits and once they look ok, whoever takes
> care of the qcom tree can pick them up too and route the whole pile
> through there?
>
Well, some maintainers prefer to pick the independent patches through their
tree. That's why I moved those patches to the start of the series.
> This way there's no needless dependency between trees...
>
If you are fine with all patches going through qcom tree, I do not have any
issue :)
Thanks,
Mani
> Hmm.
>
> --
> Regards/Gruss,
> Boris.
>
> https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
--
மணிவண்ணன் சதாசிவம்
Powered by blists - more mailing lists