On Fri, 28 Jan 2022 23:30:14 +0100 Marcel Holtmann wrote: > > Thanks for fixing the warnings! :) > > > > I presume this is for the net-next given the name of your tree, but > > a lot of patches here have fixes tags. What's your methodology on > > separating fixes from new features? > > > > I think it may be worth adjusting the filter there and send more > > stuff earlier to Linus's tree. Especially fixes with the right mix > > of confidence and impact or pure device ID additions. > > > > To be clear - happy to pull this PR as is, I was meaning to ask about > > this for a while. > > we started to add Fixes: tag whenever you can identify a faulty commit or > can track down the original issue. This way we can later easily go back > and check. It have to note that a lot of vendor trees cherrypick patches > and this helps them picking the right ones. Thumbs up for that! > I reviewed the list of patches again, and frankly none of them are super > critical to go to Linus right away. My concern is that GregKH will start asking us why we hold onto trivial fixes like 5201d23cc8e5 until the merge window, I think this merge window has overflown his patch ID scheme ;) The risk of pushing fixes in early -rc's should be pretty low. But your call at the end of the day! > So if you don’t mind, please pull. Sure thing, done! :)
