From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4AE5C433F5 for ; Wed, 2 Mar 2022 08:00:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S239920AbiCBIBW (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Mar 2022 03:01:22 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:43994 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S239910AbiCBIBT (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Mar 2022 03:01:19 -0500 Received: from mail-wm1-x333.google.com (mail-wm1-x333.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::333]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 009E0B6D14 for ; Wed, 2 Mar 2022 00:00:35 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-wm1-x333.google.com with SMTP id y5so611960wmi.0 for ; Wed, 02 Mar 2022 00:00:35 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to; bh=6EnkP3G89LOuEbKkRGHr/q7Nv6a/aOjFoR0uEwGT1xw=; b=V8fPKFqwDJ8Dy92I3pVJC3xxFxCIKmvAa/jsclT9eI84ZRpMU+6blTDMSq3wpPRcTk zZhPp9VzQZHIhlsQF6ITQ7EZj4Kbxpir5WDl2o5UMXcNjYUdqZ9KbD8ZIEee79oTvyEH oFlXI2XCf3pWVQ9NP5O6S1L/9c/KLCZuJtb5axFJS1BLq7GTyCKR/3I4KL9caLjhcsZS 5fLJqEZpm4O0d2IGoj9TPHQcH2VNKrBphqyMQZ+egHZL2+pvx9614lcv0FyeCrulPFGf 9LnKjV8+z0qAPTASDepCdXWTH1391WGpUi4an8+Iy5XY1UgVcq26sE93Gxsjo/NNfRs6 QLjA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to; bh=6EnkP3G89LOuEbKkRGHr/q7Nv6a/aOjFoR0uEwGT1xw=; b=r2Y5YJxsHetNu9AtB2tM9uyZSKRJN9TCSYe81xXU9IKPyw5eX9JmsIjE9NCecIM3GK ndh6C++qYKB1BX7wjvL+LNuJ7hD8Oko8uoW5fMZKWw6yP6PR6Dlih70fRop6+tW409MY HwEMlHLQw3BqunibQzzLx9Ix5NRtW3fEbY+Im/eBcW9gEpppUuKpNSw5JI+NM0Eq0SU9 ZlVHm+VygtaL0PC+11G8i2jg+WtWTMKYorOs4nnB1bwmIPjGJ6CVtxL9NlJZKYp+YzPL mXscEv7j9koghaQV2y6LIRQLMKtwSm0pKDCFh9/CwVU+gExdElp+HO+/KecAgTyUUY6m J9uw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533OLmQ8JCaRHEjIzhju49WOl3V99kiNyNX7xtZ/HjlHXMyEKsKg OyKWVm0JrmqTp672ym6eYcBVnA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwvSxBoudapBNvzLrn0ekB10uvEM8VCg20AuY76WEEr8NkSk85eSx/VJI98pWsRrWnk48wFgA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:4e10:b0:381:a004:5855 with SMTP id b16-20020a05600c4e1000b00381a0045855mr4807543wmq.70.1646208034474; Wed, 02 Mar 2022 00:00:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from google.com (cpc155339-bagu17-2-0-cust87.1-3.cable.virginm.net. [86.27.177.88]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w22-20020a7bc756000000b0038171f6bb63sm4827495wmk.35.2022.03.02.00.00.33 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 02 Mar 2022 00:00:34 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2022 08:00:31 +0000 From: Lee Jones To: Greg KH Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Arnd Bergmann , Alistair Francis , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux Next Mailing List , Robert Marko Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the char-misc tree with the mfd tree Message-ID: References: <20220228193928.3ec6ee98@canb.auug.org.au> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-next@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 01 Mar 2022, Greg KH wrote: > On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 10:54:57AM +0000, Lee Jones wrote: > > On Tue, 01 Mar 2022, Greg KH wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 09:37:41AM +0000, Lee Jones wrote: > > > > On Mon, 28 Feb 2022, Greg KH wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 12:46:44PM +0000, Lee Jones wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, 28 Feb 2022, Greg KH wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 09:01:49AM +0000, Lee Jones wrote: > > > > > > > > On Mon, 28 Feb 2022, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Today's linux-next merge of the char-misc tree got a conflict in: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I did ask for this *not* to be merged when it was in -testing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sorry, I missed that, I saw your ack on the patch so that's why I took > > > > > > > it. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'll follow-up with Greg. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should I revert this from my tree? > > > > > > > > > > > > I did try to catch it before a revert would have been required. > > > > > > > > > > My fault. > > > > > > > > > > > But yes, please revert it. > > > > > > > > > > Will go do so now. > > > > > > > > Thank you. > > > > > > > > > > The Ack is not standard and should not be merged. > > > > > > > > > > I do not understand this, what went wrong here? > > > > > > > > The "Ack" you saw was just a placeholder. > > > > > > > > When I provided it, I would have done so like this: > > > > > > > > "For my own reference (apply this as-is to your sign-off block): > > > > > > > > Acked-for-MFD-by: Lee Jones " > > > > > > > > REF: https://lore.kernel.org/all/YQ0fYe531yCyP4pf@google.com/ > > > > > > > > The majority of maintainers I regularly work with know this to mean > > > > that the set is due to be routed via MFD (with a subsequent > > > > pull-request to an immutable branch to follow), since MFD is often > > > > the centre piece (parent) of the patch-sets I deal with. > > > > > > > > I appreciate that this could cause confusion, but I'm not sure of a > > > > better way to convey this information such that it survives through > > > > various submission iterations. > > > > > > But what else is another maintainer supposed to think if they see that > > > ack on the patch? Ignore it? I took that to mean "this is good from a > > > mfd-point-of-view" which meant it can go through whatever tree it is > > > supposed to. > > > > > > Are you wanting this individual patch to go through your tree now only? > > > If so, you should say that by NOT acking it :) > > > > It's not quite as easy as that. > > > > It wouldn't be fair to the contributor to start reviews once all the > > other patches in the set are ready to be merged. So how would I > > indicate that the MFD part is ready, fully expecting some of the other > > patches in the set to be reworked and subsequent revisions are to be > > submitted? > > But from an "outside" observer, this patch series seemed to have acks > from all maintainers, yet no one was taking it. Which is why I picked > it up (someone asked me to.) Having the subsystem maintainer ack it > implied to me that there was no problem. Odd that you later on had one :) I understand the problem and I'm not blaming you for your assumptions. Can you recommend a better solution though? To be fair this very seldom causes issues. And now you know, you know. :) > > > How do you want to see this merged? > > > > The plan is for the whole set to be merged together via MFD. > > > > All of the other maintainers have now Acked, so it's ready to go: > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220131133049.77780-1-robert.marko@sartura.hr/ > > > > Looking at the diff, I'm not entirely sure why you took it in the > > first place? > > As I mentioned above, someone else asked me to as it was sitting around > for quite a while with no movement. Probably better for them to reply to the 0th patch in the first instance. -- Lee Jones [李琼斯] Principal Technical Lead - Developer Services Linaro.org │ Open source software for Arm SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog