netdev - RE: [PATCH v2 0/8] treewide: Add R-Car S4-8 Ethernet Switch support

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: <TYBPR01MB534149567C3CF601FC335702D84E9@TYBPR01MB5341.jpnprd01.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Thu, 22 Sep 2022 01:20:25 +0000
From:   Yoshihiro Shimoda <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@...esas.com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
CC:     "kishon@...com" <kishon@...com>,
        "vkoul@...nel.org" <vkoul@...nel.org>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "edumazet@...gle.com" <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        "pabeni@...hat.com" <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        "richardcochran@...il.com" <richardcochran@...il.com>,
        "robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        "krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org" 
        <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        "geert+renesas@...der.be" <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
        "andrew@...n.ch" <andrew@...n.ch>,
        "linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org" 
        <linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 0/8] treewide: Add R-Car S4-8 Ethernet Switch support

Hi Jakub,

Thank you for your reply!

> From: Jakub Kicinski, Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2022 10:07 AM
> 
> On Thu, 22 Sep 2022 00:46:34 +0000 Yoshihiro Shimoda wrote:
> > I thought we have 2 types about the use of the treewide:
> > 1) Completely depends on multiple subsystems and/or
> >    change multiple subsystems in a patch.
> > 2) Convenient for review.
> >
> > This patch series type is the 2) above. However, should I use
> > treewide for the 1) only?
> 
> I thought "treewide" means you're changing something across the tree.
> If you want to get a new platform reviewed I'd just post the patches
> as RFC without any prefix in the subject. But I could be wrong.

Using RFC is reasonable, I think. I'll use this at next time. Thanks!

> My main point (which I did a pretty poor job of actually making)
> was that for the networking driver to be merged it needs to get
> posted separately.

I'll separate patches for the networking driver on v3 patch.

Best regards,
Yoshihiro Shimoda