[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190922151257.51173d89@cakuba.netronome.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2019 15:12:57 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
To: Christophe Roullier <christophe.roullier@...com>
Cc: <robh@...nel.org>, <davem@...emloft.net>, <joabreu@...opsys.com>,
<mark.rutland@....com>, <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
<alexandre.torgue@...com>, <peppe.cavallaro@...com>,
<linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
<andrew@...n.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] net: ethernet: stmmac: some fixes and optimization
On Fri, 20 Sep 2019 07:38:12 +0200, Christophe Roullier wrote:
> Some improvements (manage syscfg as optional clock, update slew rate of
> ETH_MDIO pin, Enable gating of the MAC TX clock during TX low-power mode)
> Fix warning build message when W=1
There seems to be some new features/cleanups (or improvements as
you say) here. Could you explain the negative impact not applying
these changes will have? Patches 1 and 3 in particular.
net-next is now closed [1], and will reopen some time after the merge
window is over. For now we are only expecting fixes for the net tree.
Could you (a) provide stronger motivation these changes are fixes; or
(b) separate the fixes from improvements?
Thank you!
[1] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/networking/netdev-FAQ.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists