On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 09:17:52AM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote: > On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 06:27:42PM -0800, Olof Johansson wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 05:17:10PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote: > > > Hi ARM SoC maintainers, > > > > > > The following changes since commit 1001354ca34179f3db924eb66672442a173147dc: > > > > > > Linux 4.9-rc1 (2016-10-15 12:17:50 -0700) > > > > > > are available in the git repository at: > > > > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tegra/linux.git tags/tegra-for-4.10-mailbox > > > > > > for you to fetch changes up to 68050eb6c611527232fe5574c7306e97e47499ef: > > > > > > mailbox: tegra-hsp: Use after free in tegra_hsp_remove_doorbells() (2016-11-18 14:32:13 +0100) > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Thierry > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > > mailbox: Add Tegra HSP driver > > > > > > This contains the device tree bindings and a driver for the Tegra HSP, a > > > hardware block that provides hardware synchronization primitives and is > > > the foundation for inter-processor communication between CPU and BPMP. > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Dan Carpenter (1): > > > mailbox: tegra-hsp: Use after free in tegra_hsp_remove_doorbells() > > > > > > Joseph Lo (2): > > > soc/tegra: Add Tegra186 support > > > > I don't think you really needed to merge this in here, since all you need it > > for is to fulfill the kconfig dependency and enable the driver, right? That'd > > happen when the driver and soc branch is merged at the toplevel anyway. > > The reason I did this is that I wanted each branch to be buildable as a > way to confirm that the dependencies are correct. In order to do that I > need the Kconfig symbol to enable the driver. Good point, but that's more of a local setup thing for you, and not something that necessarily needs to go upstream. > I suppose there are other ways I could've done that, though. Maybe in > the future new SoC Kconfig symbols should just be introduced way ahead > of time, so that they're already in a release or two before actual code > starts to emerge. That'd work too! > > Anyhow, no damage done, I've merged this in. I would say that it'd be a little > > more logical to send the SoC branch before the driver branch given this > > dependency though. > > The reason that the SoC branch was sent after is because only the first > commit in that branch was pulled into the mailbox branch. > > In retrospect, I think perhaps a better approach would've been to have a > separate branch with only the Kconfig symbol addition and pull that in > where needed. That could work, but the whole branch-merge-features-then-enable it workflow is quite acceptable as well. -Olof -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
