08:48 <krzk> olofj: arnd: could you clarify what to do with two pull requests who did not make to v5.17? I mean: arm64: dts: samsung: Second pull for v5.17

08:48 <krzk> https://lore.kernel.org/all/d79e19e8-e15d-fe09-6ebc-c1f8aaacfc00@canonical.com/

08:49 <krzk> olofj: arnd: and second: "memory: drivers for v5.17" - https://lore.kernel.org/all/724c16d2-5afc-4d41-8d84-3ba570d14cee@canonical.com/

08:49 <krzk> olofj: arnd: I can rebase them and send again as material for v5.18, but I want to avoid case when I do it and you also apply the old v5.17 pull req.

09:12 <arnd> krzk: olofj said a few days ago that he'd go through all the contents of the arm/late branch to see which of them still make sense for v5.17 after the close of the merge window, but I don't know how far he got

09:16 <arnd> looking at the branches, I think the majority of the contents would be 5.18 material. Feel free to rebase and send anything you think should be in the fixes branch separately from the 5.18 contents

09:32 <krzk> arnd: yeah, I also think this is the best. I'll send an email to skip these v5.17 pull requests.

12:38 <mraynal> geertu: we are experiencing issues with the mail server and gmail right now declines our messages

12:40 <mraynal> geertu: I was telling you that I will use the #ifdefs and the patch sent earlier today was sent before I saw that you insisted on it

12:40 <mraynal> geertu: you will probably never receive that message

13:44 <Amit_T> is it not possible use platform_get_resource and friends API' in the child node's driver probe routine, and only of_get_* are available ?

13:45 <Amit_T> something like similar issue, https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/linux-kernel-70/num_resources%3D0-in-platform_driver-4175669292/

15:29 <geertu> mraynal: Actually I did receive that email

15:30 <geertu> Ah, through infradead, i.e. the list. And "This message was not sent to Spam because of a filter you created."

15:32 <mraynal> geertu: really? I received an auto "nack" response from gmail

15:35 <geertu> mraynal: So I received it through the list. BTW, what was the error?

15:37 <mraynal> geertu: this message is likely suspicious due to the very low reputation of the sending domain. To best protect our users from spam, the message has been blocked.

15:37 <mraynal> that is a known problem on our side that arise very recently

15:38 <geertu> mraynal: I did "report as not spam". hope it helps

15:40 <mraynal> geertu: thanks :)

19:46 <Xogium> so… I just encountered something I'm not sure about

19:46 <Xogium> I built my own kernel and enabled the ASoC driver for cs42l51 chip

19:47 <Xogium> that then built 2 modules, snd_soc_cs42l51 and snd_soc_cs42l51_i2c

19:47 <Xogium> for some reason, only the first one got loaded on boot… not the second

19:47 <Xogium> can someone explain what's happening here ?

19:48 <Xogium> I really have to put a modules-load.d drop-in to force it to load ?

20:40 <ukleinek> geertu, mraynal: What is the context of "I saw that you insisted on [the #ifdefs]"?

20:40 <ukleinek> something about the of_match_ptr() patches?