On Friday 21 June 2013, Jason Cooper wrote: > On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 10:30:47AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Friday 21 June 2013, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > > > I am by far not an expert on how to solve merge strategies and so on, > > > but to avoid conflicts at Linus's level while merging the arm-soc and > > > pci trees, it would be better if this Samsung PCIe driver could go > > > through arm-soc (with Bjorn ACK, of course), so that Arnd/Olof can > > > make sure the ordering is correct with regard to the of/pci changes and > > > the mvebu/pci driver. > > > > Yes, good point. > > > > The alternative would be that Bjorn also takes the PCI branch dependencies > > that are already in arm-soc into his tree. Either way works, but I agree > > that what you suggest would be simpler. > > Yes, that is why we did it this way. It was my understanding based on > previous comments by yourself and LinusW that you both had patches > depending on (now called) mvebu/of_pci. So we got it into arm-soc > early so those branches could depend on it. Right. I wasn't paying enough attention for the early merges that Olof did. 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
 |