On Fri, 2015-10-23 at 11:26 +0200, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 12:40:02PM +0800, Yong Wu wrote:
> > But the mtk-iommu depend on the drivers/memory/mtk-smi.c(mtk-iommu
> > has called a function of the mtk-smi).
> > So if there is dependence here, How should we do to merge them?
>
> I can surely merge mtk-smi too, if it gets proper Reviewed-by and
> Acked-by tags from the maintainer(s).
>
>
> Joerg
>
Hi Joerg,
About the driver/memory/, We don't know who is his maintainer.
MAINTAINERS file don't have drivers/memory maintainer.
>From the history in drivers/memory/ it looks like most of the
drivers land with an ack from the architecture maintainer.
And Matthias Brugger is our "ARM/Mediatek SoC support" maintainer.
Then do you mean that we need Matthias's ACK or whom others?
By the way, I will send the next version after Robin reposting
Short-descriptor. maybe in next week.
On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 01:58:13PM +0800, Yong Wu wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-10-23 at 11:26 +0200, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 12:40:02PM +0800, Yong Wu wrote:
> > > But the mtk-iommu depend on the drivers/memory/mtk-smi.c(mtk-iommu
> > > has called a function of the mtk-smi).
> > > So if there is dependence here, How should we do to merge them?
> >
> > I can surely merge mtk-smi too, if it gets proper Reviewed-by and
> > Acked-by tags from the maintainer(s).
> >
> >
> > Joerg
> >
> Hi Joerg,
>
> About the driver/memory/, We don't know who is his maintainer.
> MAINTAINERS file don't have drivers/memory maintainer.
> From the history in drivers/memory/ it looks like most of the
> drivers land with an ack from the architecture maintainer.
> And Matthias Brugger is our "ARM/Mediatek SoC support" maintainer.
>
> Then do you mean that we need Matthias's ACK or whom others?
Yes, I think the sub-architecture maintainer's ACK is probably going to
be as good as it gets. Historically drivers/memory hasn't had enough of
a common ground to instate a framework.
Thierry
On Tue, 2015-11-24 at 11:38 +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 01:58:13PM +0800, Yong Wu wrote:
> > On Fri, 2015-10-23 at 11:26 +0200, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> > > On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 12:40:02PM +0800, Yong Wu wrote:
> > > > But the mtk-iommu depend on the drivers/memory/mtk-smi.c(mtk-iommu
> > > > has called a function of the mtk-smi).
> > > > So if there is dependence here, How should we do to merge them?
> > >
> > > I can surely merge mtk-smi too, if it gets proper Reviewed-by and
> > > Acked-by tags from the maintainer(s).
> > >
> > >
> > > Joerg
> > >
> > Hi Joerg,
> >
> > About the driver/memory/, We don't know who is his maintainer.
> > MAINTAINERS file don't have drivers/memory maintainer.
> > From the history in drivers/memory/ it looks like most of the
> > drivers land with an ack from the architecture maintainer.
> > And Matthias Brugger is our "ARM/Mediatek SoC support" maintainer.
> >
> > Then do you mean that we need Matthias's ACK or whom others?
>
> Yes, I think the sub-architecture maintainer's ACK is probably going to
> be as good as it gets. Historically drivers/memory hasn't had enough of
> a common ground to instate a framework.
>
> Thierry
Got it.
Thanks very much for your reply.
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-mediatek mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mediatek