Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Sun, 9 Jun 2019 22:45:10 +0200
From:   Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
To:     Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com>
Cc:     netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-amlogic@lists.infradead.org, linus.walleij@linaro.org,
        bgolaszewski@baylibre.com, peppe.cavallaro@st.com,
        alexandre.torgue@st.com, joabreu@synopsys.com,
        devicetree@vger.kernel.org, narmstrong@baylibre.com,
        khilman@baylibre.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        davem@davemloft.net, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [RFC next v1 0/5] stmmac: honor the GPIO flags for the PHY reset
 GPIO
Message-ID: <20190609204510.GB8247@lunn.ch>
References: <20190609180621.7607-1-martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20190609180621.7607-1-martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

> Patch #1 and #4 are minor cleanups which follow the boyscout rule:
> "Always leave the campground cleaner than you found it."

> I
> am also looking for suggestions how to handle these cross-tree changes
> (patch #2 belongs to the linux-gpio tree, patches #1, 3 and #4 should
> go through the net-next tree. I will re-send patch #5 separately as
> this should go through Kevin's linux-amlogic tree).

Hi Martin

Patches 1 and 4 don't seem to have and dependencies. So i would
suggest splitting them out and submitting them to netdev for merging
independent of the rest.

Linus can probably create a stable branch with the GPIO changes, which
David can pull into net-next, and then apply the stmmac changes on
top.

	Andrew