On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 5:57 PM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 3:54 PM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 3:38 PM Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On Thu, Aug 17, 2023 at 2:44 PM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > need protection by a lock. If no one objects, I will back out that
> > > > change myself, queue this patch in renesas-pinctrl-for-v6.6, and send
> > > > a PR tomorrow.
> > >
> > > Shouldn't this even go in for v6.5?
> > > Or is it non-urgent?
> > >
> > > (Maybe I already asked, I have teflon-memory.)
> >
> > If you're still taking fixes for v6.5, I can do that.
> > Else, it will have to wait for a stable backport after v6.6-rc1.
>
> IOW, please let me know if I should move these 3 commits to a fixes
> branch.
I'd say that is up to the driver maintainer, hehe :D
I can only determine if changes to the core or my own drivers
are urgent. I am hopefully sending some fixes today but if more
urgent stuff need to go in, such is life.
> BTW, they conflict with commit 060f03e95454a0f4 ("pinctrl:
> Explicitly include correct DT includes") in pinctrl/for-next...
Yeah, we'll figure it out... I think. Worst case we toss some
merge conflicts at Torvalds.
Yours,
Linus Walleij
