On 29/08/2013 16:23, Felipe Balbi wrote:
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 12:06:32PM +0200, Benoit Cousson wrote:
Hi Felipe
On 27/08/2013 21:56, Felipe Balbi wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 12:30:21PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 01:37:32PM -0500, Felipe Balbi wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 10:37:32AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 04:13:23PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
On 08/27/2013 04:05 PM, Benoit Cousson wrote:
On 27/08/2013 16:02, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
On 08/27/2013 03:57 PM, Benoit Cousson wrote:
+ Kevin,
On 27/08/2013 15:53, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
What do we do now?
Cannot you just merge the stable arm-soc/dt branch into your branch
before applying your patches?
That is up to Greg. This changes sat in his usb-next tree for a while
now. And before they hit Greg they were in Felipe's tree for a while.
To be exact, last .dts change via USB was:
Author: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
AuthorDate: Thu Jun 20 12:13:04 2013 +0200
Commit: Felipe Balbi <balbi@xxxxxx>
CommitDate: Fri Aug 9 17:40:16 2013 +0300
usb: musb dma: add cppi41 dma driver
Mmm, if that branch is supposed to be stable, I'm not sure it will be
doable...
Maybe we should do the other way around? And merge usb-next into
arm-soc/dt.
Kevin, Olof?
Please be aware that I have no response so far regarding [0] from Greg.
[0] http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-usb/msg92595.html
Nor will you, given that I am not the one to take these patches, Felipe
is. I noticed now that you said "please route around Felipe", but
sorry, no, I'm not going to do that unless there's a really good reason.
Felipe seems to be around at the moment, please work with him on this.
If you will still take a 'part2' pull request from me, I can send you
urgent bugfixes by friday. If I have some time left, I can even try to
get that sorted out by tomorrow.
For 3.12 stuff, like "fixes", sure, I can take them this week, that
should give us a week or so for linux-next testing, right?
that's correct. I have most of them already queued up, let me just go
over my linux-usb maildir again and make sure I got all the important
stuff in.
cheers, thanks for opening this 'window'.
There are two patches in my DTS tree that conflict with the usb-next.
I will remove that one (ARM: dts: AM33XX: don't redefine OCP bus and
device nodes) , as suggested by Olof, since it is the biggest source
of conflict from my tree.
The second one is easily fixable, and Stephen already did it, but it
will be even better it you could take it in your tree.
This is the patch you did that I just slightly renamed (ARM: OMAP5:
dts: fix reg property size).
I'm done with Pull requests for Greg. If the conflict is easy to solve,
what's the problem in having the conflict to start with ?
Well, it is mainly the other one that is a pain to fix. Since I was
about to send another pull-request, I was wondering if you'll be OK to
take it.
Regards,
Benoit
--
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
