On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 5:22 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > Either way works for me, too. Right now, I would tend to let you send it > to Linus directly because I haven't looked at the latest versions of the > code for some time. Directly to Linus it is then. > While I generally trust you to do the right thing > there, I'm not 100% comfortable to vouch for it in the way that an Ack > or pull would imply without doing a more detailed review of the latest > code. Sure, I fully understand. > I know that I promised you that review, but haven't gotten to it, sorry. > I've done a 5 minute review now and it absolutely looks good to go in > as far as I can tell, so I certainly don't object to you sending it > to Linus for 3.3. Thanks. > If you think you need more Acks or if there are other > reasons to have it go through arm-soc, please tell me and I'll try harder > to find the time for a proper review. I do have explicit Acks on the changes to other sub-systems, though ideally I'd be happy to have some explicit Acks on the generic code too. But I hope this should be fine. Let's try to proceed this way and see how it goes (maybe I should just tell Linus that despite the lack of explicit Acks to some of the patches, people do think this is good-to-go). Thanks! Ohad. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
