* Re: [PATCH v6 1/8] staging: rtl8723bs: fix buffer over-read in rtw_update_protection [not found] ` <2026050434-construct-starter-5468@gregkh> @ 2026-05-07 21:56 ` Salman Alghamdi 2026-05-08 5:00 ` Greg KH 0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread From: Salman Alghamdi @ 2026-05-07 21:56 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Greg KH; +Cc: luka.gejak, straube.linux, linux-staging, linux-kernel, stable On May 04, 2026 12:35 +03, Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_mlme.c | 10 ++++++++-- > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > You should not mix patches for the current release (i.e. this one), with > patches for the next release (i.e. the rest of the patches in this > series), as that means I can't take the full series for either :( > > Please break this up into two different sets of patches and resend them > that way. Hi Greg, Thank you for the review. Two questions before I resend: 1. How do I tell which release a patch targets? Is it purely based on whether it's a bug fix (current release) vs. a new change (next release), or is there a more specific rule I should follow? 2. For versioning the split series, should the bug fix patch restart at v1, and the rest of the series continue at v7? Or should I keep them sequential (bug fix as v7, next-release patches as v8)? Thanks, Salman Alghamdi ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v6 1/8] staging: rtl8723bs: fix buffer over-read in rtw_update_protection 2026-05-07 21:56 ` [PATCH v6 1/8] staging: rtl8723bs: fix buffer over-read in rtw_update_protection Salman Alghamdi @ 2026-05-08 5:00 ` Greg KH 0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread From: Greg KH @ 2026-05-08 5:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Salman Alghamdi Cc: luka.gejak, straube.linux, linux-staging, linux-kernel, stable On Fri, May 08, 2026 at 12:56:09AM +0300, Salman Alghamdi wrote: > On May 04, 2026 12:35 +03, Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > > drivers/staging/rtl8723bs/core/rtw_mlme.c | 10 ++++++++-- > > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > You should not mix patches for the current release (i.e. this one), with > > patches for the next release (i.e. the rest of the patches in this > > series), as that means I can't take the full series for either :( > > > > Please break this up into two different sets of patches and resend them > > that way. > > Hi Greg, > Thank you for the review. > > Two questions before I resend: > 1. How do I tell which release a patch targets? Is it purely based on whether it's a bug fix (current release) vs. a new change (next release), or is there a more specific rule I should follow? That is exactly what it is based on. > 2. For versioning the split series, should the bug fix patch restart at v1, and the rest of the series continue at v7? Or should I keep them sequential (bug fix as v7, next-release patches as v8)? two separate series, so yes, split it that way should be fine. thanks, greg k-h ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2026-05-08 5:00 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <20260428164513.763471-1-me@cipherat.com>
[not found] ` <20260428164513.763471-2-me@cipherat.com>
[not found] ` <2026050434-construct-starter-5468@gregkh>
2026-05-07 21:56 ` [PATCH v6 1/8] staging: rtl8723bs: fix buffer over-read in rtw_update_protection Salman Alghamdi
2026-05-08 5:00 ` Greg KH
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox