Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Thu, 20 Apr 2023 07:50:27 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To:     Toke =?UTF-8?B?SMO4aWxhbmQtSsO4cmdlbnNlbg==?= <toke@toke.dk>,
        Thorsten Leemhuis <regressions@leemhuis.info>
Cc:     Kalle Valo <kvalo@kernel.org>,
        Colin Ian King <colin.i.king@gmail.com>,
        linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
        Linux kernel regressions list <regressions@lists.linux.dev>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] wifi: ath9k: Don't mark channelmap stack variable
 read-only in ath9k_mci_update_wlan_channels()
Message-ID: <20230420075027.6852197a@kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <87edoetyve.fsf@toke.dk>
References: <20230413214118.153781-1-toke@toke.dk>
        <87v8hysrzx.fsf@kernel.org>
        <87bkjqzrdm.fsf@toke.dk>
        <87edom7i6i.fsf@kernel.org>
        <877cu9wl7r.fsf@toke.dk>
        <87zg74v5cy.fsf@kernel.org>
        <f4939cb3-bc01-c9e1-aac9-2adb554bc3c4@leemhuis.info>
        <87edoetyve.fsf@toke.dk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 20 Apr 2023 16:24:53 +0200 Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen wrote:
> >> But it is always a question of time :) To save
> >> time I usually try to send two wireless tree pull requests per cycle,
> >> one early in the cycle and the second around the middle. =20
> >
> > Why not ask Linus to pull this directly from the list then?

Out of curiosity, Thorsten, do you have stats on "how long does it take
fixes to reach Linus" per tree? Stats get people to act much quicker
than pleas, just sayin' ;)

> > He doesn't
> > mind doing that for an occasional regression fix. And then he can decide
> > himself if the change is worth the risk -- and obviously can take into
> > account if he'll release and rc8 or not. =20
>=20
> I'm OK with doing it that way; I'll do so later tonight unless Kalle or
> Jakub complains before then...

Ah, just after our last(?) 6.3 PR was submitted :(
No objections to you posting this directly to Linus...

That said it is a 6.2 regression AFAICT so it's not exactly in the
"must be fixed in 6.3" category. Assuming Kalle doesn't want a PR -
should we take it into net and have it reach Linus either next Tue
(assuming no -rc8) or Thu (if -rc8)?