On Tue, 13 Jun 2023 22:00:35 +0200 Johannes Berg wrote: > On Tue, 2023-06-13 at 11:28 -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > On Tue, 13 Jun 2023 20:14:40 +0200 Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote: > > > I think this sounds reasonable, and I applaud the effort to take some > > > time off during the summer :) > > > > > > One question that comes to mind is how would this work for patchwork? > > > Would we keep using the wireless patchwork instance for the patches > > > going to -net in that period, or will there be some other process for > > > this? I realise the setup we have for ath9k is a bit special in this > > > regard with the ack-on-list+delegation, so I'm obviously mostly > > > interested in what to do about that... :) > > > > Whatever's easiest :) It's probably a good idea for Kalle to write > > down all the local rules and customs and share those with us. > > While that's probably a good idea regardless, I'd think that patchwork > doesn't really matter that much - we'll have some catching up to do > anyway after the vacations, so looking through patchwork etc. would be > perfectly acceptable. Worst case we'd notice when a patch doesn't apply, > right? :) Right, I meant it more in terms of patch flow. Is looking at which drivers have a tree specified in MAINTAINERS enough to know what should be applied directly? > Wrt. ath9k patches I guess "delegate in patchwork" won't work anymore, > but "resend to netdev" or something perhaps? We can watch PW state and apply from linux-wireless, I reckon. That said I don't know how you use delegation :)
