Pavel Machek wrote on Mon, Nov 27, 2023 at 10:25:46PM +0100: > > Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx> > > gpio: Don't fiddle with irqchips marked as immutable > > This is attempt to move people to new API, which will cause warning > for existing users. "chip_warn(gc, "not an immutable chip, please > consider fixing it!\n");". It is marked as dependency of another > patch, but I'm not sure we should be doing this in stable. And this actually did make some tests fail on tegra (other branch on this thread), it's probably safer to drop the gpio patches unless we're prepared to backport all the "make immutable" patches as well. (I don't see why it'd be required for dc3115e6c5d9 either but I didn't look all that close) > > youwan Wang <wangyouwan@xxxxxxx> > > Bluetooth: btusb: Add date->evt_skb is NULL check > > Could someone double check this? If we hit the null check, we'll be > returning success, but it sounds like an error case. I agree with your analysis; added Youwan and Luiz in recipients. btusb_mtk_hci_wmt_sync will return 0 if the skb is null here -- should this be setting err = -EINVAL or something? > > Jani Nikula <jani.nikula@xxxxxxxxx> > > drm/msm/dp: skip validity check for DP CTS EDID checksum > > This is preparation for future cleanup, do we need it? (For cleanup patches I'd say if it makes future backports easier it doesn't hurt to take them) -- Dominique Martinet | Asmadeus
