On 4/3/19 9:57 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
On Mon, 25 Mar 2019, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
On 3/25/19 8:53 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
On Sat, 23 Mar 2019, Jacek Anaszewski wrote:
Hi Lee,
Can we have your ack for this going via LED tree, please?
Patch looks okay.
You can take it through the LED, but if you do I will need you to send
me a pull-request to a minimised immutable branch please.
If you cannot do this, I can apply the set and provide the same to
you.
If you choose the former:
Acked-for-MFD-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@xxxxxxxxxx>
Please let me know what you decide
I've been exposing integration branches in the past, but after Linus'
message [0] I have my doubts now. I wonder if it wouldn't make more
sense if I just took the patches, and you'd cherry-pick them only in
case such a need occurs. This way we would avoid this whole merge
noise, which in an optimistic and very plausible case will not be needed
at all.
[0] https://lkml.org/lkml/2017/4/19/1104
That email is 2 years old, and does not seem relevant to what we're
trying to achieve. I've only ever had issues when *not* creating
immutable branches for these, cross subsystem scenarios. The
shared branches I create are always minimalist and never change.
I'm happy to take the patches and create a suitable pull-request for
you if you are uncomfortable with the process. I just need your Ack
to do so. Up to you.
I don't have any problem with the process. The clear gain of cherry
picking is more linear history. And the branch can be always created
when such a need occurs in linux-next.
That being said, I will send you a pull request once we sort out
the problem with obtaining a reference to the backlight node.
--
Best regards,
Jacek Anaszewski
