Hi Kukjin, On Wed, Mar 28 2012, Kukjin Kim wrote: >>> As a result I'm dropping this tree -- and all of the patches that I >>> have on top of it -- from mmc-next so that I can get a pull request >>> out. This means that I'm dropping: >> > Hmm, I think, if you're ok, you can send a second pull request to > Linus for it and actually, it is in linux-next for a long time via mmc > and samsung tree. > > Note, please don't rebase it because its resolution for conflicts is > in linux-next and I think Linus will use it when happens > conflicts...Or I can provide new tree on top of latest mainline. But > I'm not sure about latter. I can't send the tree as it is to Linus now, because Arnd has asked us to hold off on these device tree bindings and work with the unified bindings he's proposing instead. (Rebasing to drop that patch will introduce new conflicts.) I'm going to send Mark Brown's two patches to Linus now, even though it will cause a conflict in -next. The rest (other than the device tree bindings) are mergable after -rc1, because they're fixes, so we'll eventually get everything except DT in to 3.4. I think you should just drop this patchset from your tree in linux-next entirely now. Thanks, - Chris. -- Chris Ball <cjb@xxxxxxxxxx> <http://printf.net/> One Laptop Per Child -- 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
 |