Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760101AbZFKNS3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Jun 2009 09:18:29 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756180AbZFKNSV (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Jun 2009 09:18:21 -0400 Received: from smtp-out.google.com ([216.239.33.17]:26255 "EHLO smtp-out.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752594AbZFKNSU (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Jun 2009 09:18:20 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; s=beta; d=google.com; c=nofws; q=dns; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to: cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-system-of-record; b=IKxzlU2BpcNJSuVVcGxVfHohLg8AQcsyjTsrpV78i+gacrfg8a1IIWviwbaP6XWN7 1TY5/Tiut55Fc3xLoXgVw== MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20090611135442.6b9ab315@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> References: <20090611111821.GK795@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20090611.042226.28424489.davem@davemloft.net> <20090611114911.GL795@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20090611.050030.169859977.davem@davemloft.net> <20090611123852.GM795@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20090611135442.6b9ab315@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 06:18:15 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: HTC Dream aka. t-mobile g1 support From: Brian Swetland To: Alan Cox Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux , David Miller , pavel@ucw.cz, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk, san@android.com, rlove@google.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-System-Of-Record: true Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1904 Lines: 41 On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 5:54 AM, Alan Cox wrote: > > Make your tree the core ARM code only, any other patches you don't > accept. Aggressively push stuff out to platform code, and if people want > to change core code "because our platform is different" make them extract > it into the platform layer not carry it in the core bits. > > Nominate a bunch of people for the main ARM platforms. What they put into > their platform specific trees goes direct from them to -next and if they > trash their own platform thats their problem (and they can come to you > for advice ;)) > > Leave it to the platform people to push their driver code through the > right channels. This would seem to address a lot of the scalability issues, and from what I can tell, it's pretty hard for somebody mucking stuff up in arch/arm/mach-something/... to break arch/arm/mach-otherthing/... I'd be thrilled to get the msm stuff in to the main tree and deal with patches submitted against it (and the android stuff in staging seems to show that people will start submitting patches against things if it's in the mainline -- for example the binder patches that have turned up, etc). As far as what we're maintaining in the android-msm tree, there's: generic android drivers -- most of which are already in staging thanks to Greg arch/arm/mach-msm/... -- 7k (and soon 8k) SoC support various msm drivers -- could be submitted via drivers/staging and the usual review process a couple small generic arm patches -- stuff that we should be discussing in lakml some generic linux patches -- Arve's pretty good about sending these to lkml as they happen Brian -- 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/