Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:1;
Date:   Tue, 26 Sep 2023 17:49:08 +0530
From:   Dhruva Gole <d-gole@ti.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
CC:     <linux-spi@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@ti.com>,
        kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>,
        Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] spi: spi-cadence-quadspi: Fix missing unwind goto
 warnings
Message-ID: <20230926121908.mcyyj42buqr4ov3m@dhruva>
References: <20230919074658.41666-1-d-gole@ti.com>
 <ZRK+oDrT4vaZ0R/G@finisterre.sirena.org.uk>
 <20230926114046.5ukretunoud3yv45@dhruva>
 <ZRLHVReL9Bq4PNvS@finisterre.sirena.org.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ZRLHVReL9Bq4PNvS@finisterre.sirena.org.uk>
Precedence: bulk

On Sep 26, 2023 at 13:58:13 +0200, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 05:10:46PM +0530, Dhruva Gole wrote:
> 
> > Pardon, which branch is this being applied on?
> 
> It'll have been applied as a fix so against 6.6.

Umm I don't think the commit being fixed is there in 6.6?
I am not really sure how I should base/format the patch? Please can you
tell me what's expected in such a case ideally?

-- 
Best regards,
Dhruva Gole <d-gole@ti.com>