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:   Fri, 8 Nov 2019 11:53:55 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To:     Georgi Djakov <georgi.djakov@linaro.org>
Cc:     Linux PM list <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL v2] interconnect changes for 5.5
Message-ID: <20191108105355.GA683899@kroah.com>
References: <dd4ff7e3-920d-979b-c29b-7535d84d360f@linaro.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <dd4ff7e3-920d-979b-c29b-7535d84d360f@linaro.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.2 (2019-09-21)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Nov 08, 2019 at 10:59:11AM +0200, Georgi Djakov wrote:
> Hi Greg,
> 
> This is the updated pull request with interconnect patches for the 5.5 merge
> window. The details are in the signed tag. Please pull into char-misc-next.

Ugh, ok, can we just go back to sending patches instead?

The first two patches have "Fixes:" tags for older kernels, yet no
stable tags.  That's not ok.

For patch 5, you are playing "chicken" with what module gets loaded
first, and in the end you're not going to win, only delay the
inevitable.  We now have the driver core framework to support
dependencies like this, please use that instead.

So, can you drop patch 5, fix up patches 1 and 2, and go back to sending
patches instead of pull requests as if these were patches, I could have
fixed up 1 and 2 myself.

thanks,

greg k-h