From: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
Cc: "Pali Rohár" <pali.rohar@gmail.com>,
"Pavel Machek" <pavel@ucw.cz>,
"Benoît Cousson" <bcousson@baylibre.com>,
"Rob Herring" <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
"Pawel Moll" <pawel.moll@arm.com>,
"Mark Rutland" <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
"Ian Campbell" <ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk>,
"Kumar Gala" <galak@codeaurora.org>,
linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: n900: Include adp1653 device
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 08:24:53 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160127162452.GJ19432@atomide.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160127111828.GK5783@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
* Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> [160127 03:19]:
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 11:02:37AM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > In my opinion this patch is not support for new hardware. It just add
> > missing DT definition for one specific board for HW which was added to
> > linux kernel in v4.2-rc1 version. For me it looks like that needed DT
> > definition was forgotten...
>
> Opinions differ, but ultimately it's up to whoever is responsible for
> accepting the patch, and in the case of ARM SoC based patches, the
> arm-soc maintainers.
Yeah. Sorry for long delay as discussed. I'm applying the $subject
patch finally into omap-for-v4.6/dt today.
We still have at least two fixes left to go that both affect also
n900. But at least I can now sanely test adding new stuff with a WIP
fix for the PM runtime regression.
> The arm-soc maintainers close their trees for development changes a
> few weeks before hand (a patch of mine which was acked etc by 7th
> December never made the 4.5 merge window either, and the alleged
> reason I've been told is because arm-soc was already closed by then).
Heh I too have some pending clock framework patches from December
that I did not repost yet as the maintainers notified that they
rather not take new stuff any longer for v4.5 before the holidays.
Regards,
Tony
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Tony Lindgren <tony-4v6yS6AI5VpBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux-lFZ/pmaqli7XmaaqVzeoHQ@public.gmane.org>
Cc: "Pali Rohár" <pali.rohar-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>,
"Pavel Machek" <pavel-+ZI9xUNit7I@public.gmane.org>,
"Benoît Cousson"
<bcousson-rdvid1DuHRBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>,
"Rob Herring" <robh+dt-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
"Pawel Moll" <pawel.moll-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>,
"Mark Rutland" <mark.rutland-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org>,
"Ian Campbell"
<ijc+devicetree-KcIKpvwj1kUDXYZnReoRVg@public.gmane.org>,
"Kumar Gala" <galak-sgV2jX0FEOL9JmXXK+q4OQ@public.gmane.org>,
linux-omap-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org,
linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: n900: Include adp1653 device
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 08:24:53 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160127162452.GJ19432@atomide.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160127111828.GK5783-l+eeeJia6m9vn6HldHNs0ANdhmdF6hFW@public.gmane.org>
* Russell King - ARM Linux <linux-lFZ/pmaqli7XmaaqVzeoHQ@public.gmane.org> [160127 03:19]:
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 11:02:37AM +0100, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > In my opinion this patch is not support for new hardware. It just add
> > missing DT definition for one specific board for HW which was added to
> > linux kernel in v4.2-rc1 version. For me it looks like that needed DT
> > definition was forgotten...
>
> Opinions differ, but ultimately it's up to whoever is responsible for
> accepting the patch, and in the case of ARM SoC based patches, the
> arm-soc maintainers.
Yeah. Sorry for long delay as discussed. I'm applying the $subject
patch finally into omap-for-v4.6/dt today.
We still have at least two fixes left to go that both affect also
n900. But at least I can now sanely test adding new stuff with a WIP
fix for the PM runtime regression.
> The arm-soc maintainers close their trees for development changes a
> few weeks before hand (a patch of mine which was acked etc by 7th
> December never made the 4.5 merge window either, and the alleged
> reason I've been told is because arm-soc was already closed by then).
Heh I too have some pending clock framework patches from December
that I did not repost yet as the maintainers notified that they
rather not take new stuff any longer for v4.5 before the holidays.
Regards,
Tony
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: tony@atomide.com (Tony Lindgren)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] ARM: dts: n900: Include adp1653 device
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 08:24:53 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160127162452.GJ19432@atomide.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160127111828.GK5783@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
* Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> [160127 03:19]:
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 11:02:37AM +0100, Pali Roh?r wrote:
> > In my opinion this patch is not support for new hardware. It just add
> > missing DT definition for one specific board for HW which was added to
> > linux kernel in v4.2-rc1 version. For me it looks like that needed DT
> > definition was forgotten...
>
> Opinions differ, but ultimately it's up to whoever is responsible for
> accepting the patch, and in the case of ARM SoC based patches, the
> arm-soc maintainers.
Yeah. Sorry for long delay as discussed. I'm applying the $subject
patch finally into omap-for-v4.6/dt today.
We still have at least two fixes left to go that both affect also
n900. But at least I can now sanely test adding new stuff with a WIP
fix for the PM runtime regression.
> The arm-soc maintainers close their trees for development changes a
> few weeks before hand (a patch of mine which was acked etc by 7th
> December never made the 4.5 merge window either, and the alleged
> reason I've been told is because arm-soc was already closed by then).
Heh I too have some pending clock framework patches from December
that I did not repost yet as the maintainers notified that they
rather not take new stuff any longer for v4.5 before the holidays.
Regards,
Tony
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-27 16:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-12-25 23:40 [PATCH] ARM: dts: n900: Include adp1653 device Pali Rohár
2015-12-25 23:40 ` Pali Rohár
2015-12-25 23:40 ` Pali Rohár
2015-12-26 18:35 ` Pavel Machek
2015-12-26 18:35 ` Pavel Machek
2016-01-09 22:38 ` Pali Rohár
2016-01-09 22:38 ` Pali Rohár
2016-01-09 22:38 ` Pali Rohár
2016-01-21 9:12 ` Pali Rohár
2016-01-21 9:12 ` Pali Rohár
2016-01-21 9:12 ` Pali Rohár
2016-01-21 9:29 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-01-21 9:29 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-01-21 9:29 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-01-21 9:50 ` Pali Rohár
2016-01-21 9:50 ` Pali Rohár
2016-01-21 10:03 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-01-21 10:03 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-01-21 10:18 ` Pavel Machek
2016-01-21 10:18 ` Pavel Machek
2016-01-21 10:18 ` Pavel Machek
2016-01-21 16:38 ` Tony Lindgren
2016-01-21 16:38 ` Tony Lindgren
2016-01-21 16:38 ` Tony Lindgren
2016-01-21 16:54 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-01-21 16:54 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-01-27 10:02 ` Pali Rohár
2016-01-27 10:02 ` Pali Rohár
2016-01-27 11:18 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-01-27 11:18 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2016-01-27 16:24 ` Tony Lindgren [this message]
2016-01-27 16:24 ` Tony Lindgren
2016-01-27 16:24 ` Tony Lindgren
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=20160127162452.GJ19432@atomide.com \
--to=tony@atomide.com \
--cc=bcousson@baylibre.com \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=galak@codeaurora.org \
--cc=ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=pali.rohar@gmail.com \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=pawel.moll@arm.com \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
/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.