Re: [PATCH V8 1/5] PCI: Add defines for Designated Vendor-Specific Extended Capability

From: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
To: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>,
	"David E. Box" <david.e.box@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>,
	dvhart@infradead.org, andy@infradead.org, bhelgaas@google.com,
	alexey.budankov@linux.intel.com,
	Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>,
	rjw@rjwysocki.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V8 1/5] PCI: Add defines for Designated Vendor-Specific Extended Capability
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2020 23:36:26 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <e09f4c44-e3d0-e14b-297f-6981516ea3bf@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201007065451.GB6148@dell>

Hi,

On 10/7/20 8:54 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Tue, 06 Oct 2020, David E. Box wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, 2020-10-06 at 19:51 -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
>>> On Tue, Oct 06, 2020 at 03:45:54PM -0700, David E. Box wrote:
>>>> Hi Bjorn,
>>>>
>>>> This patch has been acked and unchanged for weeks. Is it possible
>>>> to
>>>> get this pulled into next? We have SIOV and CXL related work that
>>>> is
>>>> using these definitions. Thanks.
>>>
>>> I acked it because I expected you to merge it along with the rest of
>>> the series.
>>>
>>> I guess I could merge this patch via the PCI tree if you really want,
>>> but that ends up being a hassle because we have to worry about which
>>> order things get merged to Linus' tree.  Better if the whole series
>>> is
>>> merged via the same tree.
>>
>> Agreed. The hope is that this series is ready for the next merge window
>> but no ack yet on V8. And if the series does not make it I'd like this
>> patch to at least get in.
> 
> If Bjorn is happy to take this patch so late in the release cycle then
> please go ahead.  The other patches are due for v5.11.

I agree (that the other patches are for 5.11) talking about merging
this series patch 2 is a mfd patch and patches 3-5 are drivers/platform/x86
patches.

Lee, FYI I'm taking over drivers/platform/x86 maintainership from Andy.

I suggest that we merge the entire series through a single tree
(with acks or reviewed-by-s from the other maintainer)
either through the mfd tree or through the drivers/platform/x86
tree. Since most changes are in drivers/platform/x86 the latter
probably makes more sense, but either way works for me.
So how would you like to proceed with this series ?

Regards,

Hans