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;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <c0005a09c89c20093ac699c97e7420331ec46b01.camel@perches.com> <9c7a79b4d21aea52464d00c8fa4e4b92638560b6.camel@perches.com>
In-Reply-To: <9c7a79b4d21aea52464d00c8fa4e4b92638560b6.camel@perches.com>
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date:   Sat, 10 Aug 2019 12:44:21 -0700
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wiL7jqYNfYrNikgBw3byY+Zn37-8D8yR=WUu0x=_2BpZA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Makefile: Convert -Wimplicit-fallthrough=3 to just
 -Wimplicit-fallthrough for clang
To:     Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Cc:     "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavo@embeddedor.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sat, Aug 10, 2019 at 12:32 PM Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:
>
> What does it take for this sort of patch to be applied by you?

The basic rule tends to be: "normal channels".

For example, in the case of most of your patches, that tends to be
through Andrew, since most of them tend to be about the scripts.

In this case, I would have expected the patch to come in the same way
that the original Makefile change came in and follow-up fallthrough
fixups have come, ie though Gustavo's tree.

I certainly do take patches directly too, but tend to do so only if I
feel there's some problem with the process.

I pulled from Gustavo earlier today to add a few more expected switch
fall-through's, I guess I can take this Makefile change directly.

               Linus