On Thursday 16 February 2012, Turquette, Mike wrote: > > > >> Ah, one more, would be better to us if arm-soc tree could provide > >> the topic branch for 'common struct clk' working as a base. > > > > Good point. Mike, can you send a pull request for whatever you have > > now as another staging branch for arm-soc? > > Arnd, we discussed linux-next as the target for the common clk core > code at Linaro Connect. Are you now asking for that code in arm-soc? > If so, I think it would be better to keep things simple only target > linux-next once V5 has hit the lists after ELC. I guess waiting for you to send out v5 is a good idea, but as Kgene mentioned it would be nice to have the series in arm-soc in order to base other branches on top of it, and we have now made it possible to update branches like this one by declaring them "staging". The main advantage that I see of putting your series into arm-soc is that I can handle the dependencies: If you want to update the series based to v6 after more review and send me a replacement pull request, I can rebase the exynos5 patches (and other conversions) on top of that. If you have a different tree in linux-next and plan to rebase it, I cannot take any other patches into arm-soc that depend on yours. The alternative would be that I take the exynos5 patches in their current shape into arm-soc and you put your patches into linux-next based on the branch that I have, and with a patch to convert exynos5 to it on top. > If you are instead referring to OMAP platform support for common clk, > that code is very infantile and not yet ready for arm-soc, especially > as it breaks OMAP2+ multi-boot. I did not mean the omap specific parts. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
 |