From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ben.hutchings@codethink.co.uk (Ben Hutchings) Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 16:14:59 +0100 Subject: [cip-dev] Backporting to the CIP Kernel In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1497971699.1935.21.camel@codethink.co.uk> To: cip-dev@lists.cip-project.org List-Id: cip-dev.lists.cip-project.org On Tue, 2017-06-20 at 14:53 +0000, Chris Paterson wrote: > Hello Ben, > > I hope the move went okay. Thanks. It didn't entirely, but the worst is over. > I plan to start backporting some patches to the CIP Kernel soon, to > begin adding support for the Renesas CIP reference platform. > > I?ve had a look at [1] and have a few of queries? > > 1) > >11. It or an equivalent fix must already exist in Linus' tree (upstream). > Is this rule set in stone? Or can patches that have been accepted into > the relevant maintainer?s branches be backported? > > Positive: We don?t have to wait up to 10 weeks for the new merge window before backporting patches > Negative: There is a small chance that the patches will be rebased in the move from linux-next to linux I think it would be fine to relax this for new hardware support. There isn't the same risk of regression if the kernel didn't support the hardware before. > 2) > For submitting patches, I assume you would like them sent to cip-dev? Yes. You can send a git pull request, but I would like to see the patches on the list even then. > 3) > For patches that add support for a new platform, would you like them > submitted in small series, as they were upstreamed? Or in one big pull > request once major support for the platform has been added upstream? Shorter series are more easy for me to digest. Ben. > [1] https://wiki.linuxfoundation.org/civilinfrastructureplatform/cipkernelmaintenance -- Ben Hutchings Software Developer, Codethink Ltd.