From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: lauri.hintsala@bluegiga.com (Lauri Hintsala)
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 10:42:44 +0300
Subject: [PATCH v3] ARM: mxs: Add initial support for Bluegiga APX4
 Development Kit
In-Reply-To: <20120330132040.GF22981@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
References: <1323766966-30502-1-git-send-email-lauri.hintsala@bluegiga.com>
 <20111219071350.GH4962@S2100-06.ap.freescale.net>
 <4EEEE40C.3000200@bluegiga.com>
 <20111219091916.GJ4962@S2100-06.ap.freescale.net>
 <20111219091322.GD14542@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
 <20120104135204.GA14741@S2100-06.ap.freescale.net>
 <20120104211800.GF11810@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
 <20120105113106.GR11810@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
 <20120330131320.GH3254@S2101-09.ap.freescale.net>
 <20120330131509.GE22981@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
 <20120330132040.GF22981@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Message-ID: <4F98FC74.3050302@bluegiga.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On 03/30/2012 04:20 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 02:15:10PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 30, 2012 at 09:13:24PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 11:31:06AM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 09:18:00PM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 09:52:05PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 09:13:22AM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>>>>>>> No.  It will be automatically removed from any update as long as it does
>>>>>>> not conform to the requirements - that is, in this case, the strings
>>>>>>> being out of sync indentified in the message to which you replied to.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Someone needs to tell me what the correct entry is supposed to look like.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Russell,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Any chance to have APX4DEVKIT included in your patch 'ARM: Update
>>>>>> mach-types' for 3.3?
>>>>>
>>>>> As it appears when I run the update script, the answer is yes.  I'll
>>>>> update the commit in the next couple of days (I want to reduce the
>>>>> number of times I re-merge the tree now that I've a git-rerere immune
>>>>> conflict to deal with.)
>>>>
>>>> I'll change that - as 3.2 was released last night.  I'm not going to
>>>> update mach-types now as that would be suicide - updating it will
>>>> mean a bunch of entries will be deleted, and we don't know whether that
>>>> will cause build failures.
>>>>
>>>> So... not this side of the merge window.
>>>
>>> Hi Russell,
>>>
>>> I thought you will send a mach-types update during v3.4 merge window,
>>> so I merged APX4DEVKIT board file and it's now on mainline (not enabled
>>> in mxs_defconfig though).  But I have not seen mach-types update yet
>>> while the merge window is almost done.  Do you still plan to send an
>>> update or plan to stop updating mach-types?
>>
>> Well, it seems I've been missing having that branch in linux-next for
>> almost the entire previous cycle.  It would be utterly irresponsible
>> to now commit that into mainline because of the -now- huge number of
>> platform IDs that it deletes.
>>
>> I assume, therefore, that you don't keep an eye on what's in linux-next.
>
> You've actually asked around the same time in the cycle as you asked last
> time, and I gave more or less the same reply back then.  Nothing's really
> changed.  There is no way in hell that I'm committing any kind of
> mach-types update _during_ a merge window.
>
> The only time that I'd consider doing that is _outside_ of a merge window
> in preparation for the _next_ merge window, and having it sit in linux-next
> for a decent amount of time so that people can see it coming, and deal with
> the implications of that update.  I'd say a minimum of a month in linux-next
> is required to avoid problems with people on vacations and the like.


Hi Russel,

I don't see any mach-types updates for linux-next. Do you have any 
chance to update mach-types now? We have been waiting apx4devkit support 
since December.

Thank you in advance.

Best regards,
Lauri Hintsala