On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 1:45 PM Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 11, 2023 at 09:36:19AM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 10, 2023 at 8:33 PM Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Wed, 04 Oct 2023 20:39:06 +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > > > > [1/1] spi: bcm2835: add a sentinel at the end of the lookup array > > > commit: 9aaa25df9b02bfe5579cbc9b4cc1177c662ec33f > > > Can you provide me with an immutable branch containing commit > > 21f252cd29f08892d48739fd7513ad79c1cff96a (the one this one fixes)? > > > We are very close to removing gpiochip_find() from the GPIOLIB and > > with this pulled we could remove it for v6.7. > > Ugh, *please* say this sort of thing when sending patches rather than > waiting until after they've been applied. The default is just to add > patches to the normal development branches which means they have the > whole history for the release cycle after them and may well have other > things applied on top of them before you get round to asking for them to > be applied on a different branch as is the case here. I'm sorry. I didn't expect the removal process to go as fast as there were quite a few users but it turned out to be almost ready now. We can wait until rc7 when your for-next branch will be more or less immutable and then you can tag 21f252cd29f08892d48739fd7513ad79c1cff96a alone (it only has a few commits between it and v6.6-rc1) if that works for you? Bart