On Sun, 1 Nov 2020 17:08:25 +0100 Dominique Martinet wrote: > Andrew Lunn wrote on Sun, Nov 01, 2020: > > > > Signed-off-by: Andrew Lunn <and...@lunn.ch> > > Acked-by: Dominique Martinet <asmad...@codewreck.org> > > > > > > > Thanks, LGTM I'll take this for next cycle unless someone is grabbing > > > these > > > > I hope to turn on W=1 by default soon in most of /net. That patch is > > likely to go to net-next. > > That would be nice! > > > What route do your patches normally take to Linus? Do you send a pull > > request to net-next? Or straight to Linus? > > I normally send pull requests straight to Linus (because I also have > fs/9p which isn't part of net/) ; but since it's really low volume I > don't like bugging him everytime for such churn and am not really sure > what to do -- that's why I asked :) > > > If this patch is not in net-next, i cannot enable it for 9p. So > > either: > > [...] > > 4) Jakub takes this patch into net-next, and i can then enable W=1 in > > 9p along with all the other sub-directories. We will get to know > > about new warnings in net-next, and next, but not in your tree. > > Developers should use next for development anyway; I think that's the > easiest way forward if you want to enable W=1 ASAP. > > I mean, if I take the patch the fixes will get in next in the next few > days sure but it'll make enabling W=1 difficult for the net-next tree > without it. > I've added Jakub to direct recipients, could you take this one?
Sure - to net-next it goes, thanks!
