Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755262Ab2KUPwZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Nov 2012 10:52:25 -0500 Received: from mho-04-ewr.mailhop.org ([204.13.248.74]:59129 "EHLO mho-02-ewr.mailhop.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754956Ab2KUPwY (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Nov 2012 10:52:24 -0500 X-Mail-Handler: Dyn Standard SMTP by Dyn X-Originating-IP: 72.84.113.162 X-Report-Abuse-To: abuse@dyndns.com (see http://www.dyndns.com/services/sendlabs/outbound_abuse.html for abuse reporting information) X-MHO-User: U2FsdGVkX18lCaWupS8I7//MZg2ttOAvi9lB34ZYYWo= Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 10:52:08 -0500 From: Jason Cooper To: Linus Walleij Cc: Sebastian Hesselbarth , Russell King , Andrew Lunn , Thomas Petazzoni , Gregory CLEMENT , Axel Lin , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Dove pinctrl fixes and DT enabling Message-ID: <20121121155208.GF22106@titan.lakedaemon.net> References: <1353317996-20841-1-git-send-email-sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com> <50ACAAF5.2030002@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1725 Lines: 37 Linus, On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 03:45:42PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote: > > On 11/21/2012 10:59 AM, Linus Walleij wrote: > >> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 10:39 AM, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote: > >>> This patch relies on a patch set for mvebu pinctrl taken through > >>> Linus' pinctrl branch. As there is no other platform than Dove > >>> involved, I suggest to take it though Jason's tree to avoid any > >>> further conflicts. > >> > >> Sounds like a plan. So you have some commit history pulled > >> in from the pinctrl tree in the MVEBU tree? > > > > I am referring to patches for a pinctrl/mvebu subfolder. IIRC Thomas > > posted that patch a while ago. Jason is currently sorting things out > > for mvebu pull requests. I guess both can comment on your question, > > as I don't fully understand it. > > So what I mean is that the patches creating pinctrl/mvebu is in the > pinctrl tree, so if patches in the MVEBU tree depend on these, > then it must have pulled in a branch from pinctrl or applied the > same patches in that tree too (which is OK *sometimes*). Yes, Thomas and Gregory informed me of the pinctrl dependency and said they were using for-next from the pinctrl tree. I've used that branch to merge and build successfully. Is that ok in practice or is there a more specific branch I should pull in as a dependency? thx, Jason. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/