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;
Feedback-ID: i56a14606:Fastmail
User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.9.0-alpha0-431-g1d6a3ebb56-fm-20230511.001-g1d6a3ebb
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <7b5c40f3-d25b-4082-807d-4d75dc38886d@app.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20230522105049.1467313-1-schnelle@linux.ibm.com>
References: <20230522105049.1467313-1-schnelle@linux.ibm.com>
Date:   Mon, 22 May 2023 13:29:39 +0200
From:   "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@arndb.de>
To:     "Niklas Schnelle" <schnelle@linux.ibm.com>,
        "Richard Cochran" <richardcochran@gmail.com>
Cc:     "Greg Kroah-Hartman" <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        "Bjorn Helgaas" <bhelgaas@google.com>,
        =?UTF-8?Q?Uwe_Kleine-K=C3=B6nig?= <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>,
        "Mauro Carvalho Chehab" <mchehab@kernel.org>,
        "Alan Stern" <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
        "Geert Uytterhoeven" <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
        "Paul Walmsley" <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
        "Palmer Dabbelt" <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
        "Albert Ou" <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Linux-Arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 00/44] treewide: Remove I/O port accessors for HAS_IOPORT=n
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, May 22, 2023, at 12:50, Niklas Schnelle wrote:

> A few patches have already been applied but I've kept those which are not yet
> in v6.4-rc3.
>
> This version is based on v6.4-rc3 and is also available on my kernel.org tree
> in the has_ioport_v5:
>
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/niks/linux.git

I think it would be best if as many patches as possible get merged
into v6.5 through the individidual subsystems, though I can take
whatever is left through the asm-generic tree.

Since the goal is to have maintainers pick up part of this, I would
recommend splitting the series per subsystem, having either a
separate patch or a small series for each maintainer that should
pick them up.

More importantly, I think you should rebase the series against
linux-next in order to find and drop the patches that are queued
up for 6.5 already. The patches will be applied into branches
that are based on 6.4-rc of course, but basing on linux-next
is usually the easiest when targeting multiple maintainer
trees.

Maybe let's give it another week to have more maintainers pick
up stuff from v5, and then send out a v6 as separate submissions.

    Arnd