On Wednesday 28 September 2011, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Show Details > On Tue, 27 Sep 2011 16:29:41 -0400 Mark Salter <msalter@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Here is v3 of the C6X architecture patch series. Patches are > > available in 'upstream-v3' branch at: > > > > git@xxxxxxxxxxxxx:/git/projects/linux-c6x-upstreaming > > Is it time for this to be included in linux-next (i.e. are you intending > to send this to Linus during the next merge window)? If so, please send > a request (cc'd to here, linux-next and linux-kernel) asking for > inclusion. I would prefer a publically fetchable tree (the tree above is > (implicitly) fetched over ssh and is so not generally available) and > branch name that does not change over time (like "for-next" or something) > but it can just be an alias for the above. > > Arnd, do you have an opinion on this? >From my perspective it can go into -next now. All the issues I have reported in version 2 have been fixed, and the comments I made this time are relatively insignificant, so I trust that Mark can fix those either between now and the merge window or provide updates during the 3.2 bug fix phase. The only thing that absolutely needs to get fixed before 3.2.0 IMO is the ptrace ABI since we can no longer change that after a release, but it should also be a trivial change. Thomas, you also had some important comments, please complain if you see those as show-stoppers for integration into linux-next. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
