Re: [patch 0/8] genirq: Support for irq domains in generic irq chip - V2

[Gerlando Falauto <gerlando.falauto@keymile.com>]

Hi Thomas,

On 05/06/2013 04:30 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Changes vs. V1:
>
> 	- Fixed the generic chip pointer thinko (Sebastian Hesselbarth)
>
> 	- Proper support for mask cache
>
> 	- Read mask hardware only for the first map of an generic chip
>            instance
>
> 	- sun4i prefix irq functions proper
>

[removed all other individual recipients to avoid useless garbage],

thanks for taking care of this. Sorry for the late response, I have been 
away for a whole week with no email access.

I understand you are providing generic changes and it would be up to us 
to update individual drivers so to take advantage of those semplifications.
Please forgive me if I got this all wrong though.

I've got a few questions then:

1) What happened to your initial proposal of renaming gc->mask_cache to 
gc->shared_mask_cache? Does that mean you intend to keep compatibility 
so individual drivers can be updated one at a time?

2) What shall we do with such potential patches for individual drivers, 
given the dependencies on your work? Wait until yours get merged?

3) [a bit OT] anyone got a clue why I cannot see my previous patch 
series on patchwork.kernel.org? Neither can I find from within 
http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel.
I looked up '[PATCH v3b 0/9] refactoring for mask_cache' and could not 
find it, only some replies to the thread were shown.
Patches/messages from the same thread are correctly shown on 
news.gmane.org under gmane.linux.kernel, though threading is broken on 
my reader; they will not be found through the web interface for 
gmane.linux.kernel though.
I noticed this was a cross post to linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org and 
stable@vger.kernel.org (which I guess is something that should not be 
done under any circumstances). And all the above works just fine for 
-stable as opposed to LKML.
Could this cross-posting be the root cause for this whole mess?

Thanks!
Gerlando