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

From: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
To: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Cc: "David E. Box" <david.e.box@linux.intel.com>,
	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: Thu, 8 Oct 2020 08:29:12 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201008072912.GE1763265@dell> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e09f4c44-e3d0-e14b-297f-6981516ea3bf@redhat.com>

On Wed, 07 Oct 2020, Hans de Goede wrote:

> 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.

Congratulations, Hans.

> 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 ?

I'm happy either way, but bear in mind that, due to the intrinsic
heterogeneous nature of MFD, I already have infrastructure to easily
apply (and send pull-requests for) cross-subsystem patch-sets.

If however, you decide that you'd really like to take the set, that's
also fine but I will require a pull-request from an immutable branch.

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
Senior Technical Lead - Developer Services
Linaro.org │ Open source software for Arm SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog