On Sun, May 9, 2021 at 12:18 PM Jonathan Cameron <jic23@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, 8 May 2021 20:21:08 +0200 > Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Unless you really like to base your work on Gregs tree for > > some reason or other, that is. > > Definitely appreciate Greg's help (and patience), but no > particularly strong reason to waste his time dealing with my > mess ups. Hopefully they'll reduce now IIO trees are going directly > into linux-next though. I'd suggest to move to sending pulls to Torvalds directly for IIO to cut the intermediary staging tree step, since now the subsystem is pretty large and see a bunch of frequent fixes that need an express path to Torvalds. Pushing through Greg per se isn't really the problem, I think the problem is that IIO is going through the staging tree which (I guess) isn't a high priority activity and not expected to carry any serious critical fixes and I guess this can cause lags. Maybe Greg has some other branch to take in IIO fixes and for-next but I don't really see the point. The IIO left in the staging tree is just regular staging business at this point, the main IIO is much more important. Linus 2: would pulling the IIO tree directly work for you if Jonathan makes up his mind in favor for that? Yours, Linus Walleij
