From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753047AbdLGQWu (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Dec 2017 11:22:50 -0500 Received: from mail-wr0-f193.google.com ([209.85.128.193]:43086 "EHLO mail-wr0-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752898AbdLGQWr (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Dec 2017 11:22:47 -0500 X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMa5tjz/oIEmge0s03qFwFTZm7mMPxhoIw3W49YA+nVWxABKKP5/EzrtHmq/vp5rm79X6e/3vQ== Message-ID: <1512663751.7042.22.camel@baylibre.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 5/8] net: phy: meson-gxl: detect LPA corruption From: Jerome Brunet To: Andrew Lunn Cc: Florian Fainelli , Kevin Hilman , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-amlogic@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20171207161248.GN24750@lunn.ch> References: <20171207142715.32578-1-jbrunet@baylibre.com> <20171207142715.32578-6-jbrunet@baylibre.com> <20171207153403.GE24750@lunn.ch> <1512661332.7042.5.camel@baylibre.com> <20171207161248.GN24750@lunn.ch> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2017 17:22:31 +0100 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 3.26.2 (3.26.2-1.fc27) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2017-12-07 at 17:12 +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote: > > Would it be Ok if send patches 1 to 5 to net ? > > and 6 to 8 separately on net-next ? > > No. The rules for stable is that a patch must really fix something and > be minimal. > > Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst > > What might be best is to develop a minimal, but ugly patch for stable. > Get it applied. Around a week later, net will be merged into > net-next. You can then have a 'revert' patch, followed by this series > making it nice and clean. Looks like a plan. Will do. Thanks Andrew. > > Andrew From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jbrunet@baylibre.com (Jerome Brunet) Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2017 17:22:31 +0100 Subject: [PATCH net-next v2 5/8] net: phy: meson-gxl: detect LPA corruption In-Reply-To: <20171207161248.GN24750@lunn.ch> References: <20171207142715.32578-1-jbrunet@baylibre.com> <20171207142715.32578-6-jbrunet@baylibre.com> <20171207153403.GE24750@lunn.ch> <1512661332.7042.5.camel@baylibre.com> <20171207161248.GN24750@lunn.ch> Message-ID: <1512663751.7042.22.camel@baylibre.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Thu, 2017-12-07 at 17:12 +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote: > > Would it be Ok if send patches 1 to 5 to net ? > > and 6 to 8 separately on net-next ? > > No. The rules for stable is that a patch must really fix something and > be minimal. > > Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst > > What might be best is to develop a minimal, but ugly patch for stable. > Get it applied. Around a week later, net will be merged into > net-next. You can then have a 'revert' patch, followed by this series > making it nice and clean. Looks like a plan. Will do. Thanks Andrew. > > Andrew From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jbrunet@baylibre.com (Jerome Brunet) Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2017 17:22:31 +0100 Subject: [PATCH net-next v2 5/8] net: phy: meson-gxl: detect LPA corruption In-Reply-To: <20171207161248.GN24750@lunn.ch> References: <20171207142715.32578-1-jbrunet@baylibre.com> <20171207142715.32578-6-jbrunet@baylibre.com> <20171207153403.GE24750@lunn.ch> <1512661332.7042.5.camel@baylibre.com> <20171207161248.GN24750@lunn.ch> Message-ID: <1512663751.7042.22.camel@baylibre.com> To: linus-amlogic@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linus-amlogic.lists.infradead.org On Thu, 2017-12-07 at 17:12 +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote: > > Would it be Ok if send patches 1 to 5 to net ? > > and 6 to 8 separately on net-next ? > > No. The rules for stable is that a patch must really fix something and > be minimal. > > Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst > > What might be best is to develop a minimal, but ugly patch for stable. > Get it applied. Around a week later, net will be merged into > net-next. You can then have a 'revert' patch, followed by this series > making it nice and clean. Looks like a plan. Will do. Thanks Andrew. > > Andrew