From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk (zeniv.linux.org.uk [62.89.141.173]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 17BC12F22; Wed, 2 Oct 2024 22:17:51 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=62.89.141.173 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1727907474; cv=none; b=R4btILSgevxPnQ2EU0ftDR7RaI0STs33JVNOEvqwoZAqVKv3MJLCRbnoLEZFVrOi/y3Owk2fTW8QWE16TafVcZjvgR26cTgA+s36kn5knZFme+vdQKJVRGahhmPnxR/SL+fiS4r9b2ekTzXDvkiIPK9SsR7sus8B2f92CFdicJs= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1727907474; c=relaxed/simple; bh=bYCBCkT4PJzCuW+fDiNi8g0Gg+6zsF+SMWzGKuWhqjw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=ER5IU+ow4EpMAWQM2LDq6W59hBYlb62ukqChiBgajfUuZYdBykntr79OkL+U2h2Cwbv8jkxbn3D+YZOCK3+ibZyhql78MPnvJSj1y/LoVeQiZwkG89CL9OETUkBKz4ER8cZr7G9NyYDEqN8xOR09IbN4kl5WWCgyCKSgyjGkWs8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=zeniv.linux.org.uk; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=ftp.linux.org.uk; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linux.org.uk header.i=@linux.org.uk header.b=PQN2UE1T; arc=none smtp.client-ip=62.89.141.173 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=zeniv.linux.org.uk Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=ftp.linux.org.uk Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linux.org.uk header.i=@linux.org.uk header.b="PQN2UE1T" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.org.uk; s=zeniv-20220401; h=Sender:In-Reply-To:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=Tsf7yJh/hDC2wPxb5Vt52AhhkS56Hjy9G/gnj7UOuWs=; b=PQN2UE1TtJTdfVhI+34vXd+sgT YZ5JVIJIbThqQ3d8KW17/etcV63Gffw4BzIrGdWhx+iJlwTh5cfnaycK4vg2tXYCrFbiz2GxI7rOG RyPCe0sfABee+ZXER1SK+sbsthreXAVk1/FucdCFZviz+LIlV1qSXbthYTb5m4jrJrAtUP/nx+X84 yBMdBIug2dZyJxp8weWWIvImkpkn/9tJHcuL1YFi5YdaKRo5M1UJaV5HnMMJTwBam1tLk98H40v1k aXsZ3GkBtN3JYvFcLQoMaZnQCNL5sNYks6RUFDdDSP7Y6J+Lvawy/GXpy2ueNNM7Wi3EAbmZmwaI1 +CRUDaKg==; Received: from viro by zeniv.linux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.98 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1sw7fJ-00000000KWw-3iJn; Wed, 02 Oct 2024 22:17:49 +0000 Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2024 23:17:49 +0100 From: Al Viro To: Linus Torvalds Cc: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, Vineet Gupta Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCHES] asm/unaligned.h removal Message-ID: <20241002221749.GI4017910@ZenIV> References: <20241001195107.GA4017910@ZenIV> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: Al Viro On Wed, Oct 02, 2024 at 11:33:23AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Tue, 1 Oct 2024 at 12:51, Al Viro wrote: > > > > Please, review. I don't really care which tree(s) does that stuff > > go through; I can put the first two in my #for-next, as long as nobody > > has objections to the patches themselves. > > Please just add the whole series to your tree. I see you already got > the ack for the parisc side, the arc side looks fine too. Both parisc and arc are already in my tree; do you really want the autogenerated patch to be there as well? Would be a recurring headache through the cycle - anyone adding an include of that sucker in their branch would have to do an explicit merge from that branch first, or deal with the silent conflicts on merge to -next (well, silent as in "git doesn't warn you"; build breakage will be there). I suppose I could do that autogenerated commit + replacement of asm-generic/unaligned.h with #include , then take the newly added includes of after -rc1, with asm-generic/unaligned.h taken out once all strays are gone, but that feels too convoluted... Or am I misparsing you? > And even if there is some further fixup required, I'd rather just have > this done and do any possible fixups later than have some kind of > "wait for everybody to ack it".