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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20230110093604.15d7c113@kernel.org> Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2023 09:36:04 -0800 From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> To: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk> Cc: Wolfram Sang <wsa@...nel.org>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>, Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 0/2] Add I2C fwnode lookup/get interfaces On Tue, 10 Jan 2023 13:02:36 +0000 Russell King (Oracle) wrote: > On Mon, Jan 09, 2023 at 12:48:37PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > This RFC series is intended for the next merge window, but we will need > > > to decide how to merge it as it is split across two subsystems. These > > > patches have been generated against the net-next, since patch 2 depends > > > on a recently merged patch in that tree (which is now in mainline.) > > > > I'd prefer to apply it all to my I2C tree then. I can also provide an > > immutable branch for net if that is helpful. > > If we go for the immutable branch, then patch 2 might as well be > merged via the net tree, if net-next is willing to pull your > immutable branch. > > Dave? Jakub? Paolo? Do you have any preferences how you'd like to > handle this? No strong preference here. Immutable branch works. Patch 2 will stick out in the diffstat for i2c so may indeed be better to apply it to net-next only, then again perhaps Wolfram prefers to have the user merged with the API? We're fine either way.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists