On Tue, 10 Jan 2023 13:02:36 +0000 Russell King (Oracle) wrote: > On Mon, Jan 09, 2023 at 12:48:37PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > This RFC series is intended for the next merge window, but we will need > > > to decide how to merge it as it is split across two subsystems. These > > > patches have been generated against the net-next, since patch 2 depends > > > on a recently merged patch in that tree (which is now in mainline.) > > > > I'd prefer to apply it all to my I2C tree then. I can also provide an > > immutable branch for net if that is helpful. > > If we go for the immutable branch, then patch 2 might as well be > merged via the net tree, if net-next is willing to pull your > immutable branch. > > Dave? Jakub? Paolo? Do you have any preferences how you'd like to > handle this? No strong preference here. Immutable branch works. Patch 2 will stick out in the diffstat for i2c so may indeed be better to apply it to net-next only, then again perhaps Wolfram prefers to have the user merged with the API? We're fine either way.
