Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.37 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.37;
Message-ID: <657784f6.5d0a0220.617b5.20ee@mx.google.com>
Date:   Mon, 11 Dec 2023 22:53:55 +0100
From:   Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@gmail.com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Cc:     Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org>, Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
        Marek =?iso-8859-1?Q?Beh=FAn?= <kabel@kernel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Li Zetao <lizetao1@huawei.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-leds@vger.kernel.org, Daniel Golle <daniel@makrotopia.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] leds: trigger: netdev: extend speeds up to 10G
References: <99e7d3304c6bba7f4863a4a80764a869855f2085.1701143925.git.daniel@makrotopia.org>
 <170142826116.3357002.9561246405642038358.b4-ty@kernel.org>
 <6577315e.050a0220.50f30.0122@mx.google.com>
 <20231211084656.26578d89@kernel.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20231211084656.26578d89@kernel.org>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Dec 11, 2023 at 08:46:56AM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Dec 2023 16:57:15 +0100 Christian Marangi wrote:
> > > [1/2] leds: trigger: netdev: extend speeds up to 10G
> > >       commit: bc8e1da69a68d9871773b657d18400a7941cbdef
> > > [2/2] docs: ABI: sysfs-class-led-trigger-netdev: add new modes and entry
> > >       commit: f07894d3b384344c43be1bcf61ef8e2fded0efe5
> > >  
> > 
> > Hi, Lee
> > 
> > I'm working on adding LEDs support for qca8081 PHY. This PHY supports
> > 2500 link speed.
> > 
> > Is it possible to have an immutable branch for this series so we can
> > have this in net-next? 
> > 
> > Jakub can you also help with this?
> 
> I'm guessing that if it's already applied - it's already applied.
>

Soo that it's problematic to also have on net-next? (Sorry for the
stupid question)

> Lee, we seem to be getting quite a few LEDs/netdev patches - do you
> reckon we should ask Konstantin for a separate repo to which we can
> both apply, and then merge that into our respective trees? Because
> stacking the changes on stable branches may get weird and/or error
> prone. Or is separate tree an overkill at this stage? IDK..

-- 
	Ansuel