On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 11:04 AM Lk Sii <lk_sii@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 2024/6/21 14:36, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 3:14 AM Lk Sii <lk_sii@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> > >> > >> On 2024/6/20 22:30, patchwork-bot+bluetooth@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > >>> Hello: > >>> > >>> This series was applied to bluetooth/bluetooth-next.git (master) > >>> by Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@xxxxxxxxxx>: > >>> > >> Hi luiz, > >> > >> i am curious why Bartosz is able to merge his changes into bluetooth > >> development tree bluetooth-next directly. > >> > > > > This conversation is getting progressively worse... > > > >> 1) > >> his changes should belong to *POWER* scope instead of *Bluetooth* > >> obviously, however, there are *NOT* any SOB tag from either power and > >> bluetooth maintainer. these changes currently only have below Acked-by > >> and Signed-off-by tags: > >> > >> Acked-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> > > > > It's a new subsystem that has been discussed and reviewed for months > > and thoroughly tested. Please refer to the cover letter under v8 > > linked in this thread. It's not related to power-management or > > power-supply, it's its own thing but IMO the best place to put it is > > under drivers/power/. And I will maintain it. > > > >> 2) > >> his changes have not merged into linus mainline tree yet. > >> > > > > This is why they are in next! They are scheduled to go in during the > > upcoming merge window. But since changes belong in multiple trees, we > > need a cross-tree merge. > > > >> 3) > >> perhaps, it is safer to pull his changes from linus mainline tree when > >> merged than to merge into bluetooth-next firstly. > >> > > > > It's not safer at all, why would spending less time in next be safer? > > > it seems this patch serial(new subsystem) does not depend on bluetooth > and also does not belong to bluetooth subsystem, but have been contained > by tip of bluetooth tree. > It's the other way around: bluetooth changes (namely the hci_qca driver) depend on the power sequencing changes. > why not follow below merging produce? > 1) you send this patch serials to Linus to merge within linus mainline tree > 2) luiz then pull your changes from linus mainline tree. > I explained this in my previous email. Why would you want these changes to needlessly wait for another release cycle? It makes no sense. It's just a regular cross-tree merge like hundreds that are performed every release. > >>> On Wed, 5 Jun 2024 14:38:48 +0200 you wrote: > >>>> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>>> > >>>> Hi! > >>>> > >>>> These are the power sequencing patches sent separately after some > >>>> improvements suggested by Bjorn Helgaas. I intend to pick them up into a > >>>> new branch and maintain the subsystem from now on. I then plan to > >>>> provide an immutable tag to the Bluetooth and PCI subsystems so that the > >>>> rest of the C changes can be applied. This new branch will then be > >>>> directly sent to Linus Torvalds for the next merge window. > >>>> > >>>> [...] > >>> > >>> Here is the summary with links: > >>> - [v9,1/2] power: sequencing: implement the pwrseq core > >>> https://git.kernel.org/bluetooth/bluetooth-next/c/249ebf3f65f8 > >>> - [v9,2/2] power: pwrseq: add a driver for the PMU module on the QCom WCN chipsets > >>> https://git.kernel.org/bluetooth/bluetooth-next/c/2f1630f437df > >>> > >>> You are awesome, thank you! > >> > > > > Why are you top-posting anyway? > > > it is caused by my bad mail client settings. thanks for reminder. > > Bart > Luiz, Marcel: Am I wasting my time with this person? Is this another Markus Elfring and I unknowingly got pulled into a nonsensical argument? Bart
