On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 7:18 AM, Kalle Valo <kv...@codeaurora.org> wrote: > + linux-wireless > > Hi Kees, > > Kees Cook <keesc...@chromium.org> writes: > >> This is the current set of outstanding networking patches to perform >> conversions to the new timer interface (rebased to -next). This is not >> all expected conversions, but it contains everything needed in networking >> to eliminate init_timer(), and all the non-standard setup_*_timer() uses. > > So this also includes patches which I had queued for > wireless-drivers-next: > > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9986253/ > https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9986245/ > > And looking at patchwork[1] I have even more timer_setup() related > patches from you. It would be really helpful if you could clearly > document to which tree you want the patches to be applied. I don't care
Hi! Sorry about that. It's been a bit tricky to juggle everything. > if it's net-next or wireless-drivers-next as long as it's not the both > (meaning that both Dave and me apply the same patch, which would be > bad). The thing is that I really do not have time to figure out for > every patch via which tree it's supposed to go. Which split is preferred? I had been trying to separate wireless from the rest of net (but missed some cases). > For now I'll just drop all your timer_setup() related patches from my > queue and I'll assume Dave will take those. Ok? > > [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/ I guess I'll wait to see what Dave says. Thanks! -Kees -- Kees Cook Pixel Security
