Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754000Ab1DNRUs (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Apr 2011 13:20:48 -0400 Received: from metis.ext.pengutronix.de ([92.198.50.35]:54719 "EHLO metis.ext.pengutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751126Ab1DNRUr (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Apr 2011 13:20:47 -0400 Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 19:20:17 +0200 From: Uwe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?= To: Russell King - ARM Linux Cc: Nicolas Pitre , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Jeremy Kerr , Lorenzo Pieralisi , Vincent Guittot , linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, Sascha Hauer , Paul Mundt , lkml , Dima Zavin , Saravana Kannan , Ben Dooks , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Common struct clk implementation, v14 Message-ID: <20110414172017.GD31990@pengutronix.de> References: <1299134429.100626.661279191478.0.gpush@pororo> <1302754859.2767.30.camel@pororo> <20110414100048.GB1611@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <1302776705.28876.113.camel@pasglop> <20110414103200.GF1611@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20110414120904.GH1611@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20110414153813.GC6259@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20110414153813.GC6259@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 2001:6f8:1178:2:215:17ff:fe12:23b0 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ukl@pengutronix.de X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on metis.ext.pengutronix.de); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-PTX-Original-Recipient: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1425 Lines: 31 Hello, On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 04:38:14PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 09:39:58AM -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > Now, the next thing is that Linus hasn't been too happy about driver stuff > coming via my tree either - it's something which has been the subject of > concern in private email. I've _already_ said something about that prior > to the recent merge window. So should I take the clk API stuff which > touches the drivers subtree? If yes, it needs to be kept entirely separate > from the rest of the ARM stuff so we don't end up mixing drivers stuff with > ARM stuff. OK, so the solution is to put this in a seperate branch. But then when platform maintainers start working with it the resulting changes will most probably go to arch/arm. So if Linus doesn't want to pull a tree that touches both drivers/clk and arch/arm, then either he has to pull the clk branch first or we have to wait for the next merge window until we can use it. I prefer the former. Best regards Uwe -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-K?nig | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | -- 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/