[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20250620.075443.1954975894369072064.fujita.tomonori@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2025 07:54:43 +0900 (JST)
From: FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@...il.com>
To: tamird@...il.com
Cc: fujita.tomonori@...il.com, aliceryhl@...gle.com, tmgross@...ch.edu,
ojeda@...nel.org, alex.gaynor@...il.com, boqun.feng@...il.com,
gary@...yguo.net, bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com, lossin@...nel.org,
a.hindborg@...nel.org, dakr@...nel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
andrew@...n.ch, netdev@...r.kernel.org, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rust: cast to the proper type
On Thu, 19 Jun 2025 11:29:56 -0400
Tamir Duberstein <tamird@...il.com> wrote:
>> > >> > Fixes: f20fd5449ada ("rust: core abstractions for network PHY drivers")
>> > >>
>> > >> Does this need to be backported? If not, I wouldn't include a Fixes tag.
>> > >
>> > > I'm fine with omitting it. I wanted to leave a breadcrumb to the
>> > > commit that introduced the current code.
>> >
>> > I also don't think this tag is necessary because this is not a bug
>> > fix. And since this tag points to the file's initial commit, I don't
>> > think it's particularly useful.
>>
>> Would you be OK stripping the tag on apply, or would you like me to send v2?
>
> Hi Tomo, gentle ping here. Does this look reasonable to you, with the
> Fixes tag stripped on apply?
Yeah, if you drop the Fixes tag, it's fine by me.
Thanks,
Powered by blists - more mailing lists