From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (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 36374368 for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2022 06:37:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8D103C433D7; Wed, 3 Aug 2022 06:37:58 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=korg; t=1659508678; bh=TEWtmPkLhI0RtdjmF1oEpEAhYBlg0ksDz42Myt068Vc=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=TGEhzl4v8hmbd0W7dEm4f8M5Gw7cwDlIJnU6ieXPBSxMm9Kd9RE0DnH9j/d5CLaTN 0ayrrR6W5RaIEprReRRxyf3AdHjjW9D24FzDFDLMO/1PrLQBXJSpdfyHOQ5QZiJ974 ihRMpVFQHpUaMfyQBf8HrFFUSqyxqPeTwQbOVLnk= Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2022 08:37:56 +0200 From: Greg KH To: Grzegorz Szymaszek , Larry Finger , Phillip Potter , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-staging@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: r8188eu: add firmware dependency Message-ID: References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-staging@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: On Wed, Aug 03, 2022 at 08:33:35AM +0200, Grzegorz Szymaszek wrote: > On Wed, Aug 03, 2022 at 08:08:31AM +0200, Greg KH wrote: > > This looks good, and I'll apply it after 5.20-rc1 is out, > > I didn’t Cc stable since the “Submitting patches” guide says it’s for > “severe bugs”, but would it be possible to backport the patch to the > older kernels? Yes, I will tag it for backporting. > > but you might want to send a follow-on patch that removes the hard-coded > > string in 2 places in the driver, and just puts it into a single define > > somewhere, to make it a bit easier over time. > > Good idea, will do so. I didn’t check if the filename is already used. > Would something like “this patch depends on patch…” (again from the > guide) be enough (assuming I will send the new patch before this one > is applied)? No need to add the "this patch depends on", I'll know that implicitly as it was sent after this one :) thanks, greg k-h