Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 10:56:27 +0200
From: "Arnd Bergmann" <>
To: "John Paul Adrian Glaubitz" <>,
 "Helge Deller" <>, "Arnd Bergmann" <>,
 Linux-Arch <>,
Cc: "Thomas Bogendoerfer" <>,,,
 "David S . Miller" <>,
 "Andreas Larsson" <>,,
 "Michael Ellerman" <>,
 "Nicholas Piggin" <>,
 "Christophe Leroy" <>,
 "Naveen N. Rao" <>,, "Brian Cain" <>,, guoren <>,
 "" <>,
 "Heiko Carstens" <>,,
 "Rich Felker" <>,,
 "H. Peter Anvin" <>,
 "Alexander Viro" <>,
 "Christian Brauner" <>,,
 "Xi Ruoyao" <>,
 "" <>,
 "LTP List" <>,
 "Adhemerval Zanella Netto" <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/15] parisc: use generic sys_fanotify_mark implementation

On Fri, Jun 21, 2024, at 10:52, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> Hi Helge and Arnd,
> On Thu, 2024-06-20 at 23:21 +0200, Helge Deller wrote:
>> The patch looks good at first sight.
>> I'll pick it up in my parisc git tree and will do some testing the
>> next few days and then push forward for 6.11 when it opens....
> Isn't this supposed to go in as one series or can arch maintainers actually
> pick the patches for their architecture and merge them individually?
> If yes, I would prefer to do that for the SuperH patch as well as I usually
> prefer merging SuperH patches in my own tree.

The patches are all independent of one another, except for a couple
of context changes where multiple patches touch the same lines.

Feel free to pick up the sh patch directly, I'll just merge whatever
is left in the end. I mainly want to ensure we can get all the bugfixes
done for v6.10 so I can build my longer cleanup series on top of it
for 6.11.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.