On Mon, Jul 21, 2025, Fuad Tabba wrote: > > The below diff applies on top. I'm guessing there may be some intermediate > > ugliness (I haven't mapped out exactly where/how to squash this throughout the > > series, and there is feedback relevant to future patches), but IMO this is a much > > cleaner resting state (see the diff stats). > > So just so that I am clear, applying the diff below to the appropriate > patches would address all the concerns that you have mentioned in this > email? Yes? It should, I just don't want to pinky swear in case I botched something. But goofs aside, yes, if the end result looks like what was the below, I'm happy. Again, things might get ugly in the process, i.e. might be temporariliy gross, but that's ok (within reason).
