Hi Olof, On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 11:20 AM, Olof Johansson <olof@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 11:10 AM, Loc Ho <lho@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> Hi Olof,, >> >>>> >>>>>> This patch set adds syscon reboot/poweroff device nodes to support reboot and >>>>>> poweroff features on X-Gene platform. >>>>>> >>>>>> Tai Nguyen (2): >>>>>> power: reset: Add syscon reboot device node for APM X-Gene platform >>>>>> power: reset: Add syscon poweroff device node for APM X-Gene Mustang platform >>>>>> >>>>>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/apm/apm-mustang.dts | 12 ++++++++++++ >>>>>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/apm/apm-storm.dtsi | 12 ++++++++++++ >>>>>> 2 files changed, 24 insertions(+) >>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> It's unclear to me what you want to happen to these patches. They are >>>>> sent to a long list of to-recipients, one of which is arm@xxxxxxxxxx. In >>>>> general, specify the person you want to take action on the patch in to >>>>> with the rest on cc. >>>> >>>> Is there an owner for all DT node files? Is that Catalina as he is >>>> owner for ARM64 arch folder? >>> >>> The ARM64 DT changes get merged through arm-soc, i.e. they get sent to >>> arm@xxxxxxxxxx by the platform maintainers and picked up by us from >>> there (Arnd, Kevin or myself). >>> >>>>> We generally ask that patches first go to the subarch maintainers, >>>>> and they in turn send it on to us (either through a pull request or >>>>> by sending the patches to be applied). In the case of X-Gene, there is >>>>> no general platform maintainer so we keep getting patches from various >>>>> engineers at APM and it's unclear to us what your intentions are. >>>>> >>>>> I'd prefer to see one (to start with) person in charge of these (i.e. one >>>>> maintainer from the APM side). Please add that person to the MAINTAINERS >>>>> file as well. >>>> >>>> Are you suggesting that we have one person to start an GIT with >>>> kernel.org to keep all these misc ack'ed patches for X-Gene (APM) that >>>> don't seems to have an maintainer/home. Then request an pull by you? >>> >>> Pull requests are convenient for us, but if it's just a patch or two, >>> sending them directly in email is fine as well. >> >> If there is an chance in pulling this power off/reset patches for >> 4.2-rc4, can you pull in as patches? Otherwise, we will go the GIT >> pull request. > > We can definitely pick them up and queue them for 4.3 (see below). We > normally want the bulk of patches before -rc4/5, but we take smaller > updates closer to the merge window as well. > >>> What I want to avoid is a large number of people sending us patches >>> directly, which is why we ask for platform maintainers to coordinate >>> and aggregate patches to send on to us. That way we have one person >>> down the chain that we knows how we want the code delivered, and that >>> can do a round of reviews before we get it. >> >> We will get an GIT setup up for this and Duc Dang will contact you for >> pull request when ready. We are debating whether we should setup a company server (where we can have full control about storage, user permissions, backup, ...) or just use github.com to host our X-Gene kernel tree. Github seems already provide everything we need for a public source tree. Per your experience, what is your (and probably other maintainers) reference in git hosting server? Is there any inconvenience or difficulty for the maintainers to pull/merge code from Github versus from a company server? Thanks! > > Ok, sounds good. If you have people in the bay area that need PGP keys > signed for this, I'd be happy to help. > > As far as the current DT patches, there's been several sent by > different people. Please aggregate them into one patch series and send > that (as git send-email is fine) to us to queue for 4.3. > > > Thanks! > > > -Olof -- Duc Dang. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
