All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>
To: Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	"arm@kernel.org" <arm@kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	Matt Porter <mporter@linaro.org>,
	Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
	Rob Herring <robherring2@gmail.com>,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
	Marc Carino <marc.ceeeee@gmail.com>,
	Gregory Fong <gregory.0xf0@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL 2/7] ARM: SoC platform changes for 3.17
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 13:35:03 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAOesGMhXJGeSKwtty=Jr6DUMFFpQYRsBBzE_bFOwB5vaP7=iFQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140811195137.GB3711@ld-irv-0074>

On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 12:51 PM, Brian Norris
<computersforpeace@gmail.com> wrote:
> + other involved parties
>
> On Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 09:47:54AM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote:
>> This is the bulk of new SoC enablement and other platform changes for 3.17:
> [...]
>> * Broadcom BCM7xxx settop box chipset is introduced
> [...]
>> Marc Carino (1):
>>       ARM: brcmstb: add infrastructure for ARM-based Broadcom STB SoCs
>
> I realize this is a bit late (the pull request is already merged), but
> I'd like to be up-front about this: there were some (late) oustanding
> review comments made on this patch [1]. I have a few patches queued
> locally for addressing many of them, but not all of the issues are
> completely resolved.
>
> Shall I simply send a revert patch for the
> arch/arm/mach-bcm/platsmp-brcmstb.c stuff, and get it in through the
> bcm -> arm-soc -> Linus merge path in 3.17-rcX? Or should I take the
> incremental improvement approach, as we have functioning code with no
> clear alternative proposal yet?

Yeah, looks like the discussion happened the first day I was on
vacation and I missed the thread in the backlog. :(

Looks like all the outstanding issues are with the SMP support. How
about you send a patch that removes/stubs those portions? It won't be
a pure revert since as mentioned in the thread SMP was combined with
platform support, but that's OK.

That way the basic platform stuff can still go in for 3.17, and we can
re-queue the SMP pieces for 3.18 once things are sorted out.


-Olof

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: olof@lixom.net (Olof Johansson)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [GIT PULL 2/7] ARM: SoC platform changes for 3.17
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 13:35:03 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAOesGMhXJGeSKwtty=Jr6DUMFFpQYRsBBzE_bFOwB5vaP7=iFQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140811195137.GB3711@ld-irv-0074>

On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 12:51 PM, Brian Norris
<computersforpeace@gmail.com> wrote:
> + other involved parties
>
> On Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 09:47:54AM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote:
>> This is the bulk of new SoC enablement and other platform changes for 3.17:
> [...]
>> * Broadcom BCM7xxx settop box chipset is introduced
> [...]
>> Marc Carino (1):
>>       ARM: brcmstb: add infrastructure for ARM-based Broadcom STB SoCs
>
> I realize this is a bit late (the pull request is already merged), but
> I'd like to be up-front about this: there were some (late) oustanding
> review comments made on this patch [1]. I have a few patches queued
> locally for addressing many of them, but not all of the issues are
> completely resolved.
>
> Shall I simply send a revert patch for the
> arch/arm/mach-bcm/platsmp-brcmstb.c stuff, and get it in through the
> bcm -> arm-soc -> Linus merge path in 3.17-rcX? Or should I take the
> incremental improvement approach, as we have functioning code with no
> clear alternative proposal yet?

Yeah, looks like the discussion happened the first day I was on
vacation and I missed the thread in the backlog. :(

Looks like all the outstanding issues are with the SMP support. How
about you send a patch that removes/stubs those portions? It won't be
a pure revert since as mentioned in the thread SMP was combined with
platform support, but that's OK.

That way the basic platform stuff can still go in for 3.17, and we can
re-queue the SMP pieces for 3.18 once things are sorted out.


-Olof

  reply	other threads:[~2014-08-11 20:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-08-08 16:47 [GIT PULL 0/7] ARM: SoC changes for 3.17 Olof Johansson
2014-08-08 16:47 ` Olof Johansson
2014-08-08 16:47 ` [GIT PULL 1/7] ARM: SoC cleanups " Olof Johansson
2014-08-08 16:47   ` Olof Johansson
2014-08-08 16:47 ` [GIT PULL 2/7] ARM: SoC platform changes " Olof Johansson
2014-08-08 16:47   ` Olof Johansson
2014-08-11 19:51   ` Brian Norris
2014-08-11 19:51     ` Brian Norris
2014-08-11 20:35     ` Olof Johansson [this message]
2014-08-11 20:35       ` Olof Johansson
2014-08-08 16:47 ` [GIT PULL 3/7] ARM: SoC board " Olof Johansson
2014-08-08 16:47   ` Olof Johansson
2014-08-08 16:47 ` [GIT PULL 4/7] ARM: SoC device-tree " Olof Johansson
2014-08-08 16:47   ` Olof Johansson
2014-08-08 16:47 ` [GIT PULL 5/7] .17 ARM: SoC driver " Olof Johansson
2014-08-08 16:47   ` Olof Johansson
2014-08-08 18:23   ` Linus Torvalds
2014-08-08 18:23     ` Linus Torvalds
2014-08-08 20:34     ` Olof Johansson
2014-08-08 20:34       ` Olof Johansson
2014-08-08 16:47 ` [GIT PATCH 6/7] phy: fix up for devm_phy_create api change Olof Johansson
2014-08-08 16:47   ` Olof Johansson
2014-08-08 16:47 ` [GIT PULL 7/7] ARM: SoC defconfig updates for 3.17 Olof Johansson
2014-08-08 16:47   ` Olof Johansson
2014-08-08 20:03 ` [GIT PULL 0/7] ARM: SoC changes " Rob Herring
2014-08-08 20:03   ` Rob Herring
2014-08-08 20:37   ` Olof Johansson
2014-08-08 20:37     ` Olof Johansson

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='CAOesGMhXJGeSKwtty=Jr6DUMFFpQYRsBBzE_bFOwB5vaP7=iFQ@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=olof@lixom.net \
    --cc=arm@kernel.org \
    --cc=computersforpeace@gmail.com \
    --cc=f.fainelli@gmail.com \
    --cc=gregory.0xf0@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=marc.ceeeee@gmail.com \
    --cc=mporter@linaro.org \
    --cc=robherring2@gmail.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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.