Re: [PULL REQUEST] i2c-for-6.8-rc1-fixed

[Linus Torvalds]

On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 at 13:30, Wolfram Sang <wsa@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>  And a big series for the
> designware-driver needed to be reverted because issues have been
> reported late in the cycle and no incremental fix has been found yet.
> This is the fixed pull requested with a missing revert added.

Honestly, with three quarters of the commits being the broken series,
followed by reverting it, I get the feeling that this would be better
rebased.

I don't like rebasing, but I also don't like "look, we had most of
these commits broken, so we just reverted them all" all noticed before
it even hits my tree.

So I really feel like at that point you go "this branch was a failure"
and start anew - aka rebase. Along with a big explanation of why a
recent rebase ended up happening, so that there is no confusion about
it.

              Linus