Re: [PATCH 0/3] dsa: mv88e6xxx: Add RMU enable/disable ops

[Jakub Kicinski]

On Mon, 16 Dec 2024 16:59:40 +0200 Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> > > There is a risk that the RMU effort gets abandoned before it becomes
> > > functional. And in that case, we will have a newly introduced rmu_enable()
> > > operation which does nothing.  
> > 
> > True, but i'm more motivated this time, i'm getting paid for the work :-)
> > 
> > And there is one other interested party as well that i know of.
> > 
> > This patch series is fully self contained, so it easy to revert, if
> > this ends up going nowhere.  
> 
> So what's a no-go is introducing code with no user.
> 
> Splitting into 2 sets like this should be fine. You could post a link to
> Github with the complete picture when you post the qca8k refactoring, so
> that we know what to expect next and where things are going. Hopefully
> it makes sense on its own and does not leave loose ends hanging.
> 
> I don't think that squashing multiple logical changes to fit the 15
> patch limit is a good idea.

Yes, we're not religious about the 15 patch rule. If you give it 
an honest try and it doesn't make sense just say so in the cover
letter.