From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9158CC38A2A for ; Fri, 8 May 2020 20:56:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66D0620725 for ; Fri, 8 May 2020 20:56:55 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="M0Q9kTtN" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727769AbgEHU4y (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 May 2020 16:56:54 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:52162 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726811AbgEHU4y (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 May 2020 16:56:54 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-x443.google.com (mail-pf1-x443.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::443]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5C017C061A0C; Fri, 8 May 2020 13:56:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pf1-x443.google.com with SMTP id w65so1552079pfc.12; Fri, 08 May 2020 13:56:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Zlm78NTnUQgNYB/Y967ROyt+Vq6Ourlp2uSc1BOpBws=; b=M0Q9kTtNIZEe1jIjMA66/OIdnRkPBbQmv8ljANvcY0f8o5u0x2faUnJ6RuiDVnOogJ AZMu4rNisN6N20x7HUsPvfqyLbVKklvH0F1W4pzLm1MKs8v8RQKA6pgoeIfwLoqeg718 UtUJ48rWMMZqrgWXdWcSZe3nY6vlDd94hg8uTaYXZc7beM9AdCXXmAOJ2GW30ETN65FD TOZ4tAx8+5NoTgNeKEmbR7Wy47gjeN6qxrA6gbJYfGatNkusS/Itn799v4Y2hjZ93CNH hlZ9LBEFqrN0W85cWQAGFgvfg7/W5nAXtacoeWpBEdbBrZBVQLvQmICPy2RbzX4/Sir5 lY8Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Zlm78NTnUQgNYB/Y967ROyt+Vq6Ourlp2uSc1BOpBws=; b=ltFIAZ1II/i2Dx32YZ83Wt/rv6XCQGZq0gQBwt6YQeLcVjoJxk82QLvCc8nefBm1rR o9yBmXwWn4l3Kcevz3bTNM/8Pc28N7Z1Cgrd8ZP6vJuNyOSXfpTJ92OUg8dZvbNL6Y8X TK1CiiYS1kcy6BhTxkOmpDmWIc09D/HY1AR2LVwqiDRBY/IUX0L9AcnAruPjIdisF6TK gGV6D31G5EHifRr+nTtAsMfv9M4VlrMtEoxTxvf/ccHCNIarkxuczOZIQoyNIUWmL/Jn SK/LVAeIEAYIv8Vh2mmlRGVZwCbLURVcfjg1bkuH+m0lQMGgp92hm9jscIlkftlN0Xm1 3QaQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuYL8zgMkD6R5zRhLHdNdOlM+XiguFBDyvAFV8g7OT9kR4LWo4H5 NisZtUi3u6CxxO6o2bMZdA542+BzBKoY9wJrqdc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypJh5cAMBBfNusXJPVcVDn9Dbj0bYJKdrDRWrc0mlA/7CUTo/0H3snaYhe30TjSHF9rjzmoNpoLfAM2489rl8dk= X-Received: by 2002:a62:7f11:: with SMTP id a17mr3486614pfd.36.1588971413629; Fri, 08 May 2020 13:56:53 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200422220559.99726-1-hdegoede@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: From: Andy Shevchenko Date: Fri, 8 May 2020 23:56:42 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: asus-nb-wmi: Do not load on Asus T100TA and T200TA To: Hans de Goede Cc: Darren Hart , Andy Shevchenko , Corentin Chary , acpi4asus-user , Platform Driver , Linux Kernel Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, May 8, 2020 at 10:54 PM Hans de Goede wrote: > On 4/23/20 12:05 AM, Hans de Goede wrote: > Andy, Darren, I see that you have already added this to the for-next > branch of linux-platform-drivers-x86. I'm not sure what your vision > on forced pushed there is. If forced pushes are ok, please drop this > patch. If not let me know and I will send out a revert. Forced pushes are not okay, but we have exceptions in some cases. It would be done here, but there are complications, i.e. we have already immutable branch merged from MFD. Of course, I would remerge it again, but I think we better not to do this right now, so, revert seems a less painful in this case. Or, if you have already done something better, than keep it as follow up improvement rather than pure revert. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko