From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon) Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2016 10:15:49 +0100 Subject: [PATCH v2 0/8] crypto: ARM/arm64 - big endian fixes In-Reply-To: References: <1476209720-21114-1-git-send-email-ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org> <20161018114932.GG10115@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <20161019030333.GA1269@gondor.apana.org.au> <20161019084607.GB9193@arm.com> Message-ID: <20161019091549.GF9193@arm.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 09:49:46AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > On 19 October 2016 at 09:46, Will Deacon wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 11:03:33AM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote: > >> I was planning merging these for 4.10. But I'm fine with them > >> going through the arm tree. Let me know what you guys want to > >> do. > > > > I assumed you'd take them through crypto, as per usual, so I didn't > > queue anything in the arm64 tree. > > > > Ard -- were you planning to get these in for 4.9? > > > > These are arguably bug fixes, but I spotted them by accident, they > weren't reported to me or anything. But it seems strange to add a cc > stable and then hold off until the next merge window. > > In any case, I don't care deeply either way, as long as they get > merged in the end. I think it makes sense to keep them together (arm64 > + ARM), so Herbert's tree is a more natural route for them to take. I > will leave it up to Herbert whether they are sent onward as fixes or > as part of v4.10 Sounds good to me. Will