From: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ti.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-next@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>,
Florian Tobias Schandinat <FlorianSchandinat@gmx.de>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm-soc tree with the omap_dss2 tree
Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2012 14:31:41 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1331296301.1927.64.camel@deskari> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201203091226.53749.arnd@arndb.de>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1106 bytes --]
On Fri, 2012-03-09 at 12:26 +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Friday 09 March 2012, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> > Merging omapdss tree through arm-soc would make sense for avoiding
> > conflicts, because almost every merge window there are some conflicts as
> > I often need to edit arch/arm files also. But I'm not sure if we have
> > ever had a conflict in drivers/video.
> >
> > But still, it's a video driver, and fbdev tree sounds more suited for a
> > video driver.
> >
> > So I don't know =). Basically it's ok for me either way also. But it
> > would be nice to have a standard way of doing this, instead of, for
> > example, merging omapdss sometimes through fbdev, sometimes through
> > arm-soc, depending on the conflicts...
>
> Actually, I did not suggest omapdss through arm-soc, the idea was that
> that the same branch gets merged into both the fbdev and the arm-soc
> trees and let the fbdev tree go to Linus first.
Ah, right, now I see. This sounds ok to me. I'll cc you when I send the
pull request to Florian (presuming the arrangement is fine for him).
Tomi
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: tomi.valkeinen@ti.com (Tomi Valkeinen)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the arm-soc tree with the omap_dss2 tree
Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2012 14:31:41 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1331296301.1927.64.camel@deskari> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201203091226.53749.arnd@arndb.de>
On Fri, 2012-03-09 at 12:26 +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Friday 09 March 2012, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> > Merging omapdss tree through arm-soc would make sense for avoiding
> > conflicts, because almost every merge window there are some conflicts as
> > I often need to edit arch/arm files also. But I'm not sure if we have
> > ever had a conflict in drivers/video.
> >
> > But still, it's a video driver, and fbdev tree sounds more suited for a
> > video driver.
> >
> > So I don't know =). Basically it's ok for me either way also. But it
> > would be nice to have a standard way of doing this, instead of, for
> > example, merging omapdss sometimes through fbdev, sometimes through
> > arm-soc, depending on the conflicts...
>
> Actually, I did not suggest omapdss through arm-soc, the idea was that
> that the same branch gets merged into both the fbdev and the arm-soc
> trees and let the fbdev tree go to Linus first.
Ah, right, now I see. This sounds ok to me. I'll cc you when I send the
pull request to Florian (presuming the arrangement is fine for him).
Tomi
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20120309/a5c2202a/attachment-0001.sig>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-03-09 12:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 64+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-03-08 6:00 linux-next: manual merge of the arm-soc tree with the omap_dss2 tree Stephen Rothwell
2012-03-08 6:00 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-03-08 6:00 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-03-08 16:16 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-03-08 16:16 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-03-09 9:35 ` Tomi Valkeinen
2012-03-09 9:35 ` Tomi Valkeinen
2012-03-09 11:50 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-03-09 11:50 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-03-09 12:14 ` Tomi Valkeinen
2012-03-09 12:14 ` Tomi Valkeinen
2012-03-09 12:26 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-03-09 12:26 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-03-09 12:31 ` Tomi Valkeinen [this message]
2012-03-09 12:31 ` Tomi Valkeinen
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2013-04-09 7:40 Stephen Rothwell
2013-04-09 7:40 ` Stephen Rothwell
2013-04-09 7:40 ` Stephen Rothwell
2013-04-09 9:32 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-04-09 9:32 ` Arnd Bergmann
2013-04-09 9:32 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-12-03 5:52 Stephen Rothwell
2012-12-03 5:52 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-12-03 5:52 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-11-30 5:18 Stephen Rothwell
2012-11-30 5:18 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-11-30 5:18 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-11-26 10:56 Stephen Rothwell
2012-11-26 10:56 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-11-26 10:56 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-11-26 15:53 ` Tony Lindgren
2012-11-26 15:53 ` Tony Lindgren
2012-09-24 9:53 Stephen Rothwell
2012-09-24 9:53 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-09-24 9:53 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-09-24 12:43 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-09-24 12:43 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-09-24 13:11 ` Tomi Valkeinen
2012-09-24 13:11 ` Tomi Valkeinen
2012-09-24 16:19 ` Tony Lindgren
2012-09-24 16:19 ` Tony Lindgren
2012-09-17 9:23 Stephen Rothwell
2012-09-17 9:23 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-09-17 9:23 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-05-14 8:51 Stephen Rothwell
2012-05-14 8:51 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-05-14 8:51 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-03-13 8:21 Stephen Rothwell
2012-03-13 8:21 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-03-13 8:21 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-03-09 7:09 Stephen Rothwell
2012-03-09 7:09 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-03-09 7:09 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-03-08 5:58 Stephen Rothwell
2012-03-08 5:58 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-03-08 5:58 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-03-08 5:55 Stephen Rothwell
2012-03-08 5:55 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-03-08 5:55 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-03-08 5:51 Stephen Rothwell
2012-03-08 5:51 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-03-08 5:51 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-03-10 9:55 ` Janusz Krzysztofik
2012-03-10 9:55 ` Janusz Krzysztofik
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1331296301.1927.64.camel@deskari \
--to=tomi.valkeinen@ti.com \
--cc=FlorianSchandinat@gmx.de \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=olof@lixom.net \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=tony@atomide.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.