On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 07:52:15PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote: > On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 07:41:50AM -0400, Mark Brown wrote: > > It's usually pretty early but Takashi will be on holiday this time so > > I'm not sure if things might be different (he was going to send the pull > > request from holiday). I also didn't guarantee that it'll be stable > > yet, can someone please tell me what the depenency is here? > We need the patch to have all imx drivers mach/* inclusion free, > so that we can enable multi-platform support for imx, which is the > whole point of the series. That doesn't answer the question. What is the dependency - what is it about this patch that something else depends on? Your cover letters just say you'd like to do this but don't mention dependencies at all and when I asked the question last night you said the same thing. I've not seen the rest of the series... > If your for-3.7 is not stable anyway, I guess the easiest the way It probably *is* stable but I'm not enthused about people pulling unsigned tags. I might rebase, though - I'm going to finalise the tree in the next few days. > to do it might be you drop the patch "ASoC: mx27vis: retrieve gpio > numbers from platform_data" from your tree and I have it be part of > the series to go via arm-soc tree as a whole. (This is the original > plan that I mentioned in v1 cover letter) You just mentioned it as a preference (you said it's something you'd like to do), please if you're doing this sort of cross tree thing be explicit about what the inter-tree relationships are. If things need to go in via the same tree say so explicitly (and ideally say way this is). The main reason I applied it straight away was that Javier mentioned that it was a bug fix and it's near the merge window and these random ARM cleanup serieses never seem to go in quickly. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
