Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Wed, 23 Mar 2022 08:39:53 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To:     Alvin =?UTF-8?B?xaBpcHJhZ2E=?= <ALSI@bang-olufsen.dk>
Cc:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
        Alvin =?UTF-8?B?xaBpcHJhZ2E=?= <alvin@pqrs.dk>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@gmail.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
        Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@gmail.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
        "netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: dsa: realtek: make interface drivers
 depend on OF
Message-ID: <20220323083953.46cdccc8@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
In-Reply-To: <20220323134944.4cn25vs6vaqcdeso@bang-olufsen.dk>
References: <20220323124225.91763-1-alvin@pqrs.dk>
        <YjsZVblL11w8IuRH@lunn.ch>
        <20220323134944.4cn25vs6vaqcdeso@bang-olufsen.dk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 13:48:56 +0000 Alvin =C5=A0ipraga wrote:
> The driver has been split in net-next and deviates significantly from
> what is in net. I can send a patch to net as well, but that will not
> cover net-next.
>=20
> View from net:
>=20
>     drivers/net/dsa/Kconfig:
>     ...
>     config NET_DSA_REALTEK_SMI
>     ...
>=20
> View from net-next:
>=20
>     drivers/net/dsa/Kconfig:
>     ...
>     source "drivers/net/dsa/realtek/Kconfig"
>     ...
>=20
>     drivers/net/dsa/realtek/Kconfig:
>     menuconfig NET_DSA_REALTEK
>         ...
>     config NET_DSA_REALTEK_MDIO
>         ...
>     config NET_DSA_REALTEK_SMI
>         ...
>=20
> I am not well-versed in the procedures here, but since 5.17 has now been
> released, isn't it more important to fix 5.18, which will soon have the
> net-next branch merged in? Hence the patch should target net-next?
>=20
> As for 5.17 and the old (net) structure, I can send a separate patch to
> net. Does that sound OK?
>=20
> Once that is clarified I can re-send with a Fixes: tag.

Just reply with a Fixes tag, I'll sort it out. I'm about to merge=20
the trees so it's a little bit of a special situation.