On Mon, Jun 29, 2026, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Arnd Bergmann <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >>> Note that most patches of this series are independent from each other. > > >>> Only the patches removing a specific interface (patches 7, 15, 26 and > > >>> 30) and the last two patches of the series depend on all previous > > >>> patches. > > >> > > >> It looks like you are touching most files twice or more here, to > > >> first convert from rdmsr to rdmsrq and then to change the > > >> two-argument rdmsrq() macro to a single-argument inline. If you > > >> introduce the inline version of rdmsrq() first, you should be > > >> able to skip the second step (patch 31) as they could be able > > >> to coexist. > > > > > > I've discussed how to structure the series with Ingo Molnar before [1]. > > > The > > > current approach was his preference. > > > > Ok. > > Note that the individual patches are IMO significantly easier to review > through the actual 32-bit => 64-bit variable assignment changes done > in isolation (which sometimes include minor cleanups), while > the Coccinelle semantic patch: > > { a(b,c) => c = a(b) } > > which changes both the function signature and the order of terms as > well, is just a single add-on treewide patch.
Is the plan for subsystem maintainers to pick up the relevant patches, and then do the treewide change one release cycle later?
