| Message ID | 20141002144452.GO20170@rric.localhost |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On Thursday 02 October 2014 16:44:52 Robert Richter wrote: > The following changes since commit 9e82bf014195d6f0054982c463575cdce24292be: > > Linux 3.17-rc5 (2014-09-14 17:50:12 -0700) > > are available in the git repository at: > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rric/linux.git tags/for-arm-soc-v3.18 > > for you to fetch changes up to 1200e87a26b6b4fe1f473267c83515117e08ee39: > > arm64, defconfig: Enable Cavium Thunder SoC in defconfig (2014-09-23 15:10:55 +0200) > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Enablement patches for Cavium Thunder SoC Family. The patches add > devicetree and Kconfig support and then add Thunder to the defconfig. I've pulled them into a new next/arm64 branch in the arm-soc tree, but noticed that you had based them on top of -rc5. If you have no strong reasons to pick a newer -rc, it's better to base on top of -rc1, to save us trouble with backmerges. I ended up rebasing to -rc1, since you gave the option to apply the patches directly. I originally missed the patches because they were not sent to arm@kernel.org but only to our personal addresses. Please include the arm@kernel.org address whenever you want patches or pull requests to get applied (as opposed to reviewed). We are not really taking new code for arm-soc any more, but this one was first submitted for inclusion a while back, so I'm making an exception. Finally, I also wanted to pull your "dts, kbuild: Implement support for dtb vendor subdirs", but that clearly conflicts with this series, and I decided not to pull that and take this one instead. I'm guessing we'd see conflicts with other patches in linux-next, so I'd rather not do the merge any more now, we can take that one for 3.19. Arnd
Arnd, On 02.10.14 17:44:48, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Thursday 02 October 2014 16:44:52 Robert Richter wrote: > > The following changes since commit 9e82bf014195d6f0054982c463575cdce24292be: > > > > Linux 3.17-rc5 (2014-09-14 17:50:12 -0700) > > > > are available in the git repository at: > > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rric/linux.git tags/for-arm-soc-v3.18 > > > > for you to fetch changes up to 1200e87a26b6b4fe1f473267c83515117e08ee39: > > > > arm64, defconfig: Enable Cavium Thunder SoC in defconfig (2014-09-23 15:10:55 +0200) > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > Enablement patches for Cavium Thunder SoC Family. The patches add > > devicetree and Kconfig support and then add Thunder to the defconfig. > > I've pulled them into a new next/arm64 branch in the arm-soc tree, > but noticed that you had based them on top of -rc5. If you have no > strong reasons to pick a newer -rc, it's better to base on top of > -rc1, to save us trouble with backmerges. > > I ended up rebasing to -rc1, since you gave the option to apply the > patches directly. thanks for applying the patches. Ok, I think a reason to update to -rc5 was a conflict in another patch of my patch stack unrelated to this series. Wasn't aware of backmerging conflicts you might get and will avoid unnecessary updates in the future. > I originally missed the patches because they were not sent to > arm@kernel.org but only to our personal addresses. Please include > the arm@kernel.org address whenever you want patches or pull requests > to get applied (as opposed to reviewed). We are not really taking > new code for arm-soc any more, but this one was first submitted > for inclusion a while back, so I'm making an exception. Will use arm@kernel.org in next requests. > Finally, I also wanted to pull your "dts, kbuild: Implement support > for dtb vendor subdirs", but that clearly conflicts with this series, > and I decided not to pull that and take this one instead. I was hoping one or the other patch set would have applied earlier, then I could have rebased them. Anyway, will do this now and let you know after the merge window closed. > I'm guessing we'd see conflicts with other patches in linux-next, > so I'd rather not do the merge any more now, we can take that one > for 3.19. Fine with me. -Robert