Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759281AbZFKVkV (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Jun 2009 17:40:21 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1758127AbZFKVkJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Jun 2009 17:40:09 -0400 Received: from exprod6og116.obsmtp.com ([64.18.1.37]:53371 "HELO exprod6og116.obsmtp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1757685AbZFKVkI convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 11 Jun 2009 17:40:08 -0400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Subject: RE: HTC Dream aka. t-mobile g1 support Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 17:40:06 -0400 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <4A3175AC.9070100@bluewatersys.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: HTC Dream aka. t-mobile g1 support Thread-Index: Acnq213KFkV3GTPbRwqaqRk9eBlnVAAAPbTQ 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> <20090611132134.GA11199@atomide.com> <20090611133736.GP795@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20090611140038.GB11199@atomide.com> <20090611140624.GS795@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <4A3175AC.9070100@bluewatersys.com> From: "H Hartley Sweeten" To: "Ryan Mallon" , "Nicolas Pitre" Cc: "Russell King - ARM Linux" , "Tony Lindgren" , "Alan Cox" , "David Miller" , , , , , , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Jun 2009 21:40:08.0207 (UTC) FILETIME=[30ACC1F0:01C9EADD] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2183 Lines: 44 On Thursday, June 11, 2009 2:23 PM, Ryan Mallon wrote: > Nicolas Pitre wrote: > > On Thu, 11 Jun 2009, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > > > I think that you, as the ARM maintainer, should continue gathering all > > the ARM subarchitectures into a coherent ARM tree and arbitrate > > conflicts when they occur. You should especially keep a tight control > > on the very core ARM code. But everything under arch/arm/mach-* you > > should let people maintaining those have control of that themselves and > > free yourself from that responsibility as much as possible. The current > > directory structure is quite indicative of where the boundaries are > > already. This way, if I make a mess of arch/arm/mach-orion5x/* then you > > just need to pass the blame straight to me. > > > > That works okay for the more popular sub-architectures like pxa, etc, > where there are a lot of people to review code and sort out issues > between themselves. However, for the architecture I do most of my work > on, ep93xx, there are basically two of us, Hartley and myself, doing > active work. > > It seems a bit dodgy if all the patches to ep93xx are written by one of > us and acked by the other with no input from anybody else. It would be > very easy for the ep93xx code to become and complete mess, and lack any > coherency with the other sub-archs. I prefer having Russell, or somebody > else, at least have a glance at the patches before they get applied. I agree with Ryan. I review everything Ryan (or others) submit for ep93xx and add my Sign-off-by or Tested-by as appropriate, I don't think I have every actually added an Acked-by to any patch (I could be wrong). Ryan does similar for my patches. Before anything actually gets applied I am much more comfortable with an ok from Russell and then going through his patch system. The third party makes sure that we don't do anything silly (or stupid). Regards, Hartley -- 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/