[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <ba14c4fb-e6a7-46b3-a030-081482264a99@app.fastmail.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 10:56:27 +0200
From: "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...db.de>
To: "John Paul Adrian Glaubitz" <glaubitz@...sik.fu-berlin.de>,
"Helge Deller" <deller@....de>, "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...nel.org>,
Linux-Arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: "Thomas Bogendoerfer" <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"Andreas Larsson" <andreas@...sler.com>, sparclinux@...r.kernel.org,
"Michael Ellerman" <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
"Nicholas Piggin" <npiggin@...il.com>,
"Christophe Leroy" <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
"Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@...ux.ibm.com>,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, "Brian Cain" <bcain@...cinc.com>,
linux-hexagon@...r.kernel.org, guoren <guoren@...nel.org>,
"linux-csky@...r.kernel.org" <linux-csky@...r.kernel.org>,
"Heiko Carstens" <hca@...ux.ibm.com>, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
"Rich Felker" <dalias@...c.org>, linux-sh@...r.kernel.org,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"Alexander Viro" <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
"Christian Brauner" <brauner@...nel.org>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
"Xi Ruoyao" <libc-alpha@...rceware.org>,
"musl@...ts.openwall.com" <musl@...ts.openwall.com>,
"LTP List" <ltp@...ts.linux.it>,
"Adhemerval Zanella Netto" <adhemerval.zanella@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/15] parisc: use generic sys_fanotify_mark implementation
On Fri, Jun 21, 2024, at 10:52, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> Hi Helge and Arnd,
>
> On Thu, 2024-06-20 at 23:21 +0200, Helge Deller wrote:
>> The patch looks good at first sight.
>> I'll pick it up in my parisc git tree and will do some testing the
>> next few days and then push forward for 6.11 when it opens....
>
> Isn't this supposed to go in as one series or can arch maintainers actually
> pick the patches for their architecture and merge them individually?
>
> If yes, I would prefer to do that for the SuperH patch as well as I usually
> prefer merging SuperH patches in my own tree.
The patches are all independent of one another, except for a couple
of context changes where multiple patches touch the same lines.
Feel free to pick up the sh patch directly, I'll just merge whatever
is left in the end. I mainly want to ensure we can get all the bugfixes
done for v6.10 so I can build my longer cleanup series on top of it
for 6.11.
Arnd
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
