On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 10:30:30AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Tuesday 14 April 2015 09:06:50 Thierry Reding wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 01:09:56AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > On Saturday 11 April 2015, Michael Turquette wrote: > > > > > Tomeu Vizoso (8): > > > > > of: Document long-ram-code property in nvidia,tegra20-apbmisc > > > > > of: Document timings subnode of nvidia,tegra-mc > > > > > memory: tegra: Disable ARBITRATION_EMEM interrupt > > > > > of: document new emc-timings subnode in nvidia,tegra124-car > > > > > of: document external-memory-controller property in tegra124-car > > > > > clk: Expose clk_hw_reparent() to providers > > > > > > > > ... this patch! I'd prefer to not do this. Let's see if > > > > .set_rate_and_parent solve the problem for you. > > > > > > Not pulling this for 4.1 then. Even without the objections, it was basically > > > too late for the amount of changes now. > > > > For my education, when do you expect pull requests with "this amount of > > changes" to be sent? > > Generally speaking, we want large patch series to come early after -rc1, > followed by smaller subsequent updates. We often don't get around to > applying stuff before -rc3, which is a problem on our side, but it helps > to have patches available by then. > > Also, if you have a large series (100+ patches) early on, we'd be more > likely to take a 20-patch series later than if the 20-patch series comes > at rc6 and is the first thing we see from you: after around rc5 or rc6, > what we want to see are mostly patches that directly result from work > that we merged earlier for the same merge window, like regression fixes > or wrapping up a larger series that was started but incomplete at -rc2. That's not generally what we've done on Tegra. We usually keep things in linux-next until around -rc6 to make sure whatever gets pulled into the arm-soc tree is stable. With what you said above I'm pretty much forced to either send you pulls that aren't well tested (linux-next isn't supposed to get new code until after -rc1) or I have to plan for an extra release cycle for anything that is "big", which would mean that many new features would potentially take 6 months to get merged. I don't like either of those choices. Thierry
Attachment:
pgpPNnIKSXBT0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
