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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81AC2C433EF for ; Tue, 25 Jan 2022 14:51:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1580633AbiAYOvY (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Jan 2022 09:51:24 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:41714 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1580352AbiAYOsW (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Jan 2022 09:48:22 -0500 X-Greylist: delayed 535 seconds by postgrey-1.37 at lindbergh.monkeyblade.net; Tue, 25 Jan 2022 06:48:13 PST Received: from swift.blarg.de (swift.blarg.de [IPv6:2a01:4f8:c17:52a8::2]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CBC0C061401; Tue, 25 Jan 2022 06:48:13 -0800 (PST) Received: by swift.blarg.de (Postfix, from userid 1000) id D0BE040E4E; Tue, 25 Jan 2022 15:39:16 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2022 15:39:16 +0100 From: Max Kellermann To: Uwe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?= Cc: linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org, thierry.reding@gmail.com, lee.jones@linaro.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, andrey@lebedev.lt, stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] pwm-sun4i: convert "next_period" to local variable Message-ID: Mail-Followup-To: Uwe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?= , linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org, thierry.reding@gmail.com, lee.jones@linaro.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, andrey@lebedev.lt, stable@vger.kernel.org References: <20220125123429.3490883-1-max.kellermann@gmail.com> <20220125143158.qbelqvr5mjq33zay@pengutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20220125143158.qbelqvr5mjq33zay@pengutronix.de> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org On 2022/01/25 15:31, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > I think I'd drop this. This isn't a fix worth on it's own to be > backported and if this is needed for one of the next patches, the stable > maintainers will notice themselves (and it might be worth to shuffle > this series to make the fixes come first). The first two patches are preparation for the third patch, which fixes the actual bug. Of course, I could have done everything in one patch, but I thought splitting the first two out makes review easier. This way, every step is almost trivial. If you want me to fold the three patches into one, I can do that. But I can't reorder them (or backport only the bug fix to stable). Max