linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL] Immutable branch between MFD, Misc and Pinctrl due for the v6.17 merge window

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: <20250718071344.GA11056@google.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2025 08:13:44 +0100
From: Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: Michael Walle <mwalle@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
	Julien Panis <jpanis@...libre.com>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Immutable branch between MFD, Misc and Pinctrl due
 for the v6.17 merge window

On Thu, 10 Jul 2025, Mark Brown wrote:

> On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 10:49:06AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > Enjoy!
> > 
> > The following changes since commit 19272b37aa4f83ca52bdf9c16d5d81bdd1354494:
> > 
> >   Linux 6.16-rc1 (2025-06-08 13:44:43 -0700)
> > 
> > are available in the Git repository at:
> > 
> >   git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/lee/mfd.git ib-mfd-misc-pinctrl-v6.17
> > 
> > for you to fetch changes up to d90171bc2e5f69c038d1807e6f64fba3d1ad6bee:
> > 
> >   dt-bindings: mfd: ti,tps6594: Add TI TPS652G1 PMIC (2025-07-10 10:40:21 +0100)
> > 
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> > Immutable branch between MFD, Misc and Pinctrl due for the v6.17 merge window
> 
> Is there some reason you didn't also pick up the regulator patches?

Is that a joke?  I'm going to assume that you're not serious!

https://lore.kernel.org/all/aCWfre2-n_PSuhxR@finisterre.sirena.org.uk/

  ">   1. Apply this now and merge the dependents next cycle
   >   2. Apply this now and provide an IB
   >   3. Wait for all Acks and apply as a unified set
   >
   > We usually choose 3, hence my assumptions above.

   Well, you choose 3 - I do think it'd be a lot easier to go with option
   2, or with applying the rest to your tree as acks come in.  There seemed
   to still be a reasonable amount of discussion on the MFD bits (eg,
   there's some formatting comments still) so I was expecting this series
   to churn some more and was waiting for a resend."

https://lore.kernel.org/all/601dd4c7-0940-498b-815e-99e570e732d2@sirena.org.uk/

  "So not apply the first two patches and share a branch like you said
   above...  TBH these serieses would probably be a bit more legible if
   the branch were created with just the MFD patches, that'd also mean
   smaller cross merges."

IRC:

  "<b*****e> Probably the easiest thing is a tag with the MFD bits and then I can apply the regulator patches?"

Etc ...

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]