On Mon, 16 Jun 2025 20:33:19 +0100 Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I am basing this on the mm-new branch in Andrew's tree, so let me know if I > should rebase anything here. Given the mm bits touched I did think perhaps > we should take it through the mm tree, however it may be more sensible to > take it through an fs tree - let me know! It's more fs/ than mm/ purely from a footprint point of view. But is there any expectation that there will be additional patches which build on this? I'll scoop it into mm-new for now, see what happens. Minus all the cc's. Sorry ;)
