[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aLcuHnj_h3Xf7DiK@gallifrey>
Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2025 17:49:18 +0000
From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <linux@...blig.org>
To: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>,
arnd@...db.de, mchehab@...nel.org, lgirdwood@...il.com,
perex@...ex.cz, tiwai@...e.com, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
linux-sound@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Remove the wl1273 FM Radio
* Laurent Pinchart (laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com) wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 02, 2025 at 12:47:39PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 02, 2025 at 01:35:27PM +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> >
> > > Patch 1/4 has been queued in the media tree and should be in linux-next
> > > as commit 103b0cfc9ab6. It is based straight on v6.17-rc1. Patch 2/4 is
> > > also in linux-next, but is based on other ALSA patches. The simplest
> > > course of action would be for you to merge 3/4 for v6.18, and 4/4 for
> > > v6.19.
> >
> > Or given that it's a driver removal we could just get a rebase of the
> > series against the meda tree applied? The conflicts with ASoC should be
> > trivial to resolve.
>
> I don't mind either way. I know Linus doesn't like having the same patch
> merged with different commit IDs, but I don't know how strict the rule
> is, especially when git should be able to resolve the conflict
> transparently.
I still think the easiest thing is to leave 1/4 and 2/4 as you currently
have them; and let Lee take 3/4 and 4/4 next time around.
Dave
> --
> Regards,
>
> Laurent Pinchart
>
--
-----Open up your eyes, open up your mind, open up your code -------
/ Dr. David Alan Gilbert | Running GNU/Linux | Happy \
\ dave @ treblig.org | | In Hex /
\ _________________________|_____ http://www.treblig.org |_______/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists