Re: [PATCH v4 0/7] Provide and use generic_handle_irq_safe() where appropriate.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]



On Tue, Feb 15 2022 at 15:42, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Feb 2022, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
>> Either way it remains bisect-able since each driver is changed
>> individually. There is no need to merge them in one go but since it is
>> that small it probably makes sense. But I don't do the logistics here.
> Okay, this is what I was asking.
> So there aren't any hard dependencies between the driver changes?
> Only the drivers are dependent on the API.


> So, if we choose to do so, we can merge the API and then subsequently
> add the users one by one into their respective subsystem, in any
> order.  This would save on creating an immutable topic branch which we
> all pull from.
> What is your preference Thomas?

I suggest doing it the following way:

 1) I apply 1/7 on top of -rc5 and tag it

 2) Driver maintainers who want to merge via their trees pull that tag
    apply the relevant driver changes

 3) I collect the leftovers and merge them via irq/core

Does that make sense?


greybus-dev mailing list -- greybus-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to greybus-dev-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

[Index of Archives]     [Asterisk App Development]     [PJ SIP]     [Gnu Gatekeeper]     [IETF Sipping]     [Info Cyrus]     [ALSA User]     [Fedora Linux Users]     [Linux SCTP]     [DCCP]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [Deep Creek Hot Springs]     [Yosemite Campsites]     [ISDN Cause Codes]     [Asterisk Books]

  Powered by Linux