On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 10:36:54AM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 7:10 PM, Jason Cooper <jason@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Sebastian, Linus, > > > > I've now created mvebu/pinctrl-dove for this series. It's based on > > v3.14-rc1, and depends on mvebu/pinctrl (which depends on > > mvebu/pinctrl-3xx). > > > > I've kept this series in a separate branch in case we encounter an > > unforeseen problem with something in here. Then this branch can be > > dropped, and /pinctrl-3xx and /pinctrl will still make it in. > > > > So, all patches except 3 and 4 are in mvebu/pinctrl-dove. 3 and 4 are > > in mvebu/dt. > > OK so what should I be pulling in first now? Of course I woke up this morning not happy with this :-/ Here's what it looks like currently: /v3.14-rc1 | --+---+---+---+---+ mvebu/pinctrl-3xx | \ |---+---+---+---+---+---+---+ mvebu/pinctrl \ \ \---------------------------+---+---+---+ mvebu/pinctrl-dove Not to scale. I would prefer to do: /v3.14-rc1 | --+---+---+---+---+ mvebu/pinctrl-cleanup | \ |----------------+--+---+---+ mvebu/pinctrl-3xx \ \ \----------------+---+---+--+---+---+---+ mvebu/pinctrl-dove But this would mean moving some patches to branches other than what they were sent with. The advantage is that /pinctrl-3xx and /pinctrl-dove don't depend on each other, and only depend on -cleanup. Which is great if there is something wrong in either branch. Sebastian, I can cherry-pick the patches around, but you know the code better than any of us, do you foresee any problems with this scenario? thx, Jason. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
