On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 9:04 AM, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 2:25 AM, Javier Martinez Canillas
> <martinez.javier@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Yes, It doesn't apply cleanly to your "next" branch cleanly because
>> this patch-set depends on the following bugfix patch merged late on
>> the -rc cycle (3.10-rc7):
>>
>> 397eada9 ("gpio/omap: don't use linear domain mapping for OMAP1")
>
> Aha, well this fix was only CC:ed to Grant so I never saw it
> happen. Obviously it cannot be merged through my GPIO tree
> then.
>
>> So, I could change the patches so they can be applied cleanly on your
>> branch but then it will not apply cleanly when you send your pull
>> request to Torvalds.
>
> That will probably not work as it would cause even more conflicts
> upstream, and now the merge window is open so no way can I
> rebase the tree either.
>
> Let's see if we can cram it in as part of a late v3.11 merge or
> if we'll have to defer to v3.12.
Linus, you can actually merge in the final v3.10 tag into your
gpio-next branch and then apply on top of that. I would send it as two
separate pull requests though. One pull with all the stuff that was in
linux-next, and a second that includes the v3.10 merge and the OMAP
patches. Include an explaination in that pull request that it is an
important bug fix, but it took a bit of time to get it worked out
correctly; hence the reason for the merge. That will let Linus T make
a decision about whether or not to merge it without affecting the bulk
of the gpio changes.
g.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
