lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [May]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] platform/x86: pmc_atom: Add Lex 3I380D industrial PC to critclk_systems DMI table
On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 03:55:22PM -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
> On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 11:20:52AM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 08-05-19 10:42, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 8, 2019 at 10:48 AM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > > On 07-05-19 22:17, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > > > > Quoting Hans de Goede (2019-05-06 08:05:42)
> > >
> > > > > I guess this is urgent?
> > > >
> > > > Somewhat, getting this into e.g. rc2 would be fine too, waiting till 5.3
> > > > would be bad.
> > >
> > > So, I can do it as a fixes for rc2, just ping me after merge window.
> >
> > Ok, will do.
>
> Andy, what is the issue here? If the dependency is in v5.1 we can do a "merge
> --ff-only v5.1" in our for-next branch in order to pull it in, that would be the
> same as an immutable branch basically.
>

A simpler solution for this case would be to issue two PRs to Linus from two
different branches. Other subsystems send topic branches, so this isn't out of
the ordinary.

I have merged the two patches in question from Hans and Steffen to for-next-2.

We could send two PRs back to back, with a note to Linus why this is a bit
different than usual, and then come back together in our for-next and fixes
branches once both are merged and continue as usual.

Any concerns with this approach?

--
Darren Hart
VMware Open Source Technology Center

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-05-09 01:24    [W:0.076 / U:1.312 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site