Hi Christian, Robert, On Wed, Jan 04, 2023 at 02:30:23PM +0100, Robert Marko wrote: > On Wed, 4 Jan 2023 at 14:04, Christian Marangi <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jan 02, 2023 at 03:25:31PM -0800, Brian Norris wrote: > > > This fixes device tree registration for 'qcom,lpass-cpu' as used by > > > qcom-ipq8064 SoCs, and allows speaker audio to function. > > > > > > This patch has been submitted (and merged, for -next) upstream. > > > > Considering it's tagged for stable and assuming it will be part of 6.2 > > wonder if it's a good idea to add the kernel tag to better track this?
I first wrote this when I had just posted the patch; didn't expect it to land so quickly! But what do you mean: just tweak the commit title to 'kernel: ...'? Or move this to the generic kernel patches (target/linux/generic/backport-5.15/)? > Also, the 900 prefix isn't really meant for backports. Ack. I only just noticed target/linux/generic/PATCHES. So I guess that's one of these? 0xx - upstream backports 1xx - code awaiting upstream merge Thanks, Brian _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
