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;
Message-ID: <6a3d7b4e-7350-e52a-6139-e14eb64191ed@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 28 Apr 2023 10:22:37 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.1.2
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] Revert "input: gpio-keys - use
 device_pm_move_to_tail"
To:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>,
        Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com>,
        Gergo Koteles <soyer@irl.hu>,
        Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
        Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        Saravana Kannan <saravanak@google.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-input@vger.kernel.org
References: <20230427221625.116050-1-opendmb@gmail.com>
 <20230427221625.116050-4-opendmb@gmail.com> <ZEtP3uRX5Ib1W_Kd@kroah.com>
 <CAJZ5v0jFAkBUAhNj8hbpM+6n1F3ETTtpxeP_QDsmKWdE=uueFw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Language: en-US
From:   Doug Berger <opendmb@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAJZ5v0jFAkBUAhNj8hbpM+6n1F3ETTtpxeP_QDsmKWdE=uueFw@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On 4/28/2023 4:40 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 28, 2023 at 6:47 AM Greg Kroah-Hartman
> <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 03:16:25PM -0700, Doug Berger wrote:
>>> This reverts commit 2569873096f7eb1acf63624e9772d82b23923bf4.
>>
>> You have to give a reason why you are reverting it please...
> 
> Also, the commit ID above doesn't match any commits in the mainline.

Apologies. I attempted to explain this in the cover letter, but as 
anticipated it caused confusion. The relevant text was:
   Both commits shouldn't really exist in the same kernel so the
   third patch reverts the first in an attempt to make that clear
   (though it may be a source of confusion for some).

This commit ID is the ID of the first patch of this set in my tree. It 
slipped my mind that of course that wouldn't be conveyed through 
send-mail :). D'oh!

To be clear, this is really a "straw man" request for comment with hope 
of finding a more elegant solution to the issue.

Thanks,
     Doug