linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] cxl: Remove driver

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: <yq1frjttt41.fsf@ca-mkp.ca.oracle.com>
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2025 22:01:50 -0500
From: "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>
To: Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, martin.petersen@...cle.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, fbarrat@...ux.ibm.com,
        ukrishn@...ux.ibm.com, clombard@...ux.ibm.com, vaibhav@...ux.ibm.com,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, Andrew Donnellan <ajd@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] cxl: Remove driver

Hi Madhavan!

> This patch has depenednecy with the first patch 
>
> https://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/2025-February/280990.html
>
> Which is already part of your staging tree. Can you please
> take this patch along with the previous patch. 

If I merge the main cxl patch we'll have another conflict due to the
docs patch below:

>> [0] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/linuxppc-dev/patch/20250219064807.175107-1-ajd@linux.ibm.com/

I don't mind taking both patches but it seems more appropriate for a
major feature removal like this to go through the relevant architecture
tree.

Maybe the path of least resistance is for you to put the cxl removal in
a separate branch and defer sending the pull request until after Linus
has merged the initial SCSI bits for 6.15?

-- 
Martin K. Petersen	Oracle Linux Engineering