From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sipsolutions.net (s3.sipsolutions.net [168.119.38.16]) (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 D583F229B18; Tue, 7 Apr 2026 09:06:40 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=168.119.38.16 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1775552802; cv=none; b=WAd4u4UOOHdWnQTgGlgLVlAEHIeIqWVMGUH+iGlOR8UWNscT9BuLaVxD5Tb6vkfkrq6eSVnS3+ccq/pFgp4IfrSueYqwMTss/TUb6UZM5US0fpM2tjwM3Lcdb4OGt4305sJ0VQ9e0/3W2VfNnr6LAq199eFSnMl4ct5N7ZGj+Jk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1775552802; c=relaxed/simple; bh=RxGTLnxZQOpYfHxurph+fCKl1j0l2IYye6XIaHGSCjw=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References: Content-Type:MIME-Version; b=BCxCMe5wgMjy09S1+fdTsPQ0GAbdY3pXW8V2m7zlnEuQ5XDNZUsDF5TuMw7RAG/VnS4TLIWUG7WNng+i6fQ/HOaNp5ZpSKiIH/pN1j+fVMZlxaHM512oLx/ZqjBKJw1VxUsq8WqfDEiwf/Io76rJGHKxVQn1GifLFB2kQRMg7ks= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sipsolutions.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sipsolutions.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sipsolutions.net header.i=@sipsolutions.net header.b=PVeW5Fux; arc=none smtp.client-ip=168.119.38.16 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sipsolutions.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sipsolutions.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sipsolutions.net header.i=@sipsolutions.net header.b="PVeW5Fux" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sipsolutions.net; s=mail; h=MIME-Version:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:References:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:To:From:Subject:Message-ID:Sender :Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-To: Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID; bh=RxGTLnxZQOpYfHxurph+fCKl1j0l2IYye6XIaHGSCjw=; t=1775552800; x=1776762400; b=PVeW5Fuxja9CNoPLzO6jrue5g79g/02PGhEXAqdfZSeKcH+ hJtdAdCk58ayOKxgsCJKes8Yvsa1FbdiIv4MBDY8RGd5Z9QAeiBmyJdtP2Tyc8dWlNPEg0NpwKUie muZ5h5XJ0ldgBmwvioICn/b+yL+bb61kCyyOIEzd6tQM5BGBsoZOw702a1NX9ZjXHwXUkmYICWzGl SgMwntTAJGZz2nW6gi70vDaM0wH4/8HB0MbXn+jG9wx9bFtfV+b3p30kEuchxEa11HVGGKsPjFOHR ga6m7rVPHAjpue50J4gwRKwmR18wfaadpiPt9C9eSHw0WEFmkUYAKYQD+pXN6fog==; Received: by sipsolutions.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_X25519__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256) (Exim 4.98.2) (envelope-from ) id 1wA2OL-0000000CBAs-2yku; Tue, 07 Apr 2026 11:06:38 +0200 Message-ID: <4ccf21800166b28cc28c72b0b1cf2672b43af8a9.camel@sipsolutions.net> Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 00/21] wifi: nxpwifi: create nxpwifi to support From: Johannes Berg To: Jeff Chen Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, francesco@dolcini.it, wyatt.hsu@nxp.com, s.hauer@pengutronix.de Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2026 11:06:36 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: <20260305143939.3724868-1-jeff.chen_1@nxp.com> <9b0144261da2ce7f5ef0a533928732cc43459e40.camel@sipsolutions.net> <8ebc201c976f11cce4802e9e34c1f479ee190ac8.camel@sipsolutions.net> <075c9a062664609a81a722883ee17e7c728b08bc.camel@sipsolutions.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.58.3 (3.58.3-1.fc43) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-malware-bazaar: not-scanned On Wed, 2026-03-25 at 21:45 +0800, Jeff Chen wrote: > Ulf prefers not to rebase or drop the SDIO ID patch from the mmc tree, > and his suggestion is for me to include an identical copy of that patch > in the nxpwifi series for wireless-next, so that the driver can build > independently during review. Since the change is trivial, he expects git > to resolve the duplication automatically when the wireless and mmc trees > are merged. > Would this approach be acceptable for wireless-next? Yeah I guess we don't have a choice ... > For reference, please see Ulf=E2=80=99s feedback here: >=20 > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-mmc/patch/20260113031517.24471= 4-1-jeff.chen_1@nxp.com/ So I think we said before that for final merge you should send a pull request anyway instead of all the individual patches. Can you include it in the pull request, as a precise cherry-pick from his tree? johannes