[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y696MSvhEUWlHSoK@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2022 23:54:25 +0000
From: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>
To: Uwe Kleine-König
<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
Cc: Uwe Kleine-König <uwe@...ine-koenig.org>,
Angel Iglesias <ang.iglesiasg@...il.com>,
Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa@...nel.org>, Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@....de>,
Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>,
Maximilian Luz <luzmaximilian@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, kernel@...gutronix.de,
linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 001/606] tpm: st33zp24: Convert to Convert to i2c's
.probe_new()
I picked it now.
BR, Jarkko
On Fri, Dec 16, 2022 at 10:09:04AM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> Hello,
>
> while rebasing my series onto today's next I noticed the Subject being
> broken:
>
> $Subject ~= s/Convert to //
>
> Apart from that I wonder who feels responsible to apply this patch (and
> the other tpm patches in this series). They got an Ack by Jarkko, but
> didn't appear in next.
>
> The plan for this series is not to apply to a single tree, but let the
> subsystem maintainers take their patches. I'd be happy if you consider
> them for the next merge window.
>
> Should I resend the tpm patches (with the subject fixed) once v6.2-rc1
> is published?
>
> Note that 662233731d66 ("i2c: core: Introduce i2c_client_get_device_id
> helper function") is already in Linus' tree, so if your tree is new
> enough (say v6.2-rc1 then) you don't need to care for this dependency.
>
> Best regards and thanks
> Uwe
>
> --
> Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
> Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Powered by blists - more mailing lists