On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 04:18:16PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 04:12:05PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > It's probably easier for me if you just use the existing branch, I've > > already got a branch based on a merge down. > Okey doke, I'll funnel that in the direction of linux-next then. It does > mean that any subsequent patches for 5.8 that depend on BTI will need to > be based on this branch, so as long as you're ok with that then it's fine > by me (since I won't be able to apply patches if they refer to changes > introduced in the recent merge window). That's not a problem, that's what I've got already and if I try to send everything based off -rc3 directly the series would get unmanagably large. Actually unless you think it's a bad idea I think what I'll do is go and send out a couple of the preparatory changes (the insn updates and the last bit of annotation conversions) separately for that branch while I finalize the revisions of the main BTI kernel bit, hopefully that'll make the review a bit more approachable.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
