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  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]
Date:   Thu, 22 Jul 2021 23:07:18 +0200
From:   Andrew Lunn <>
To:     Sergei Shtylyov <>
Cc:     Biju Das <>,
        "David S. Miller" <>,
        Jakub Kicinski <>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <>,
        Sergey Shtylyov <>,
        Adam Ford <>,
        Yuusuke Ashizuka <>,
        Yoshihiro Shimoda <>,,,
        Chris Paterson <>,
        Biju Das <>,
        Prabhakar Mahadev Lad <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 00/18] Add Gigabit Ethernet driver support

On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 11:53:59PM +0300, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
> On 7/22/21 5:13 PM, Biju Das wrote:
> > The DMAC and EMAC blocks of Gigabit Ethernet IP is almost similar to Ethernet AVB.
> > 
> > The Gigabit Etherner IP consists of Ethernet controller (E-MAC), Internal TCP/IP Offload Engine (TOE) and Dedicated Direct memory access controller (DMAC).
> > 
> > With few changes in driver, we can support Gigabit ethernet driver as well.
> > 
> > This patch series is aims to support the same
> > 
> > RFC->V1
> >   * Incorporated feedback from Andrew, Sergei, Geert and Prabhakar
> >   *
> > 
> > Biju Das (18):
> >   dt-bindings: net: renesas,etheravb: Document Gigabit Ethernet IP
> >   drivers: clk: renesas: rzg2l-cpg: Add support to handle MUX clocks
> >   drivers: clk: renesas: r9a07g044-cpg: Add ethernet clock sources
> >   drivers: clk: renesas: r9a07g044-cpg: Add GbEthernet clock/reset
>    It's not a good idea to have the patch to the defferent subsystems lumped
> all together in a single series...


Are these changes inseparable? If so, you need to be up front on this,
and you need an agreement with the subsystem maintainers how the
patches are going to be merged? Through which tree. And you need
Acked-by from the other tree maintainers.

Ideally you submit multiple patchsets. This assumes all sets will
compile independently.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists