mbox

[GIT,PULL] i.MX defconfig updates

Message ID 20130212085916.GT1906@pengutronix.de
State New
Headers show

Pull-request

git://git.pengutronix.de/git/imx/linux-2.6.git tags/arm-imx-defconfig

Message

Sascha Hauer Feb. 12, 2013, 8:59 a.m. UTC
Hi Arnd, Olof,

Two small defconfig updates for v3.9.

Sascha

The following changes since commit 836dc9e3fbbab0c30aa6e664417225f5c1fb1c39:

  Linux 3.8-rc7 (2013-02-09 08:20:39 +1100)

are available in the git repository at:

  git://git.pengutronix.de/git/imx/linux-2.6.git tags/arm-imx-defconfig

for you to fetch changes up to 09de7ee1695f182886360faf9cf66702b5342199:

  ARM: imx_v4_v5_defconfig: Add VPU support (2013-02-12 09:08:56 +0100)

----------------------------------------------------------------
ARM i.MX defconfig updates for v3.9

- enable VPU support in imx_v4_v5_defconfig to get compile coverage
- enable netfilter support

----------------------------------------------------------------
Fabio Estevam (1):
      ARM: imx_v4_v5_defconfig: Add VPU support

Javier Martinez Canillas (1):
      ARM: imx: configs: enable netfilter support

 arch/arm/configs/imx_v4_v5_defconfig |    3 +++
 arch/arm/configs/imx_v6_v7_defconfig |    1 +
 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+)

Comments

Arnd Bergmann Feb. 19, 2013, 9:48 p.m. UTC | #1
On Tuesday 12 February 2013, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> ARM i.MX defconfig updates for v3.9
> 
> - enable VPU support in imx_v4_v5_defconfig to get compile coverage
> - enable netfilter support
> 

Pulled into next/soc now. It seems harmless enough that I did not
bother putting it into a late branch.

	Arnd
Arnd Bergmann Feb. 19, 2013, 9:52 p.m. UTC | #2
On Tuesday 19 February 2013, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday 12 February 2013, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> > ARM i.MX defconfig updates for v3.9
> > 
> > - enable VPU support in imx_v4_v5_defconfig to get compile coverage
> > - enable netfilter support
> > 
> 
> Pulled into next/soc now. It seems harmless enough that I did not
> bother putting it into a late branch.

Nevermind, I just reverted my pull because Olof had already applied
it to the next/boards branch a week ago. I did not receive a reply
to the pull request, so I assumed he accidentally ignored the pull
request.

	Arnd