Hi Russell,
I've just seen this series in the mailing list archives:
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2012-March/087917.html
As some people already stated, patch 1/9 is missing.
In my case it is even worse: I didn't received any of the patches in
my mail-box despite being subscribed to the list.
As you'll probably have noticed, I'm doing some deep cleanup on
'imx-dma.c' file as you can see in the following patches:
[PATCH v2 1/2] dmaengine: Add support for MEMCPY for imx-dma.
[PATCH v3 2/2] dmaengine: Add support for multiple descriptors for imx-dma.
[PATCH 00/14] dmaengine: imx-dma: merge dma arch code into dmaengine.
Currently, I'm waiting for Sascha and Vinod to confirm that they are
fine and merge them. However, your series seems to conflict with those
patches as it modifies imx-dma.
Regards.
--
Javier Martin
Vista Silicon S.L.
CDTUC - FASE C - Oficina S-345
Avda de los Castros s/n
39005- Santander. Cantabria. Spain
+34 942 25 32 60
www.vista-silicon.com
On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 12:03:54PM +0100, javier Martin wrote:
Hi Russell,
I've just seen this series in the mailing list archives:
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2012-March/087917.html
As some people already stated, patch 1/9 is missing.
They weren't all sent to linux-arm-kernel - they were only sent to the
appropriate people listed in MAINTAINERS. So if you didn't receive them,
either the patch was not touching a driver you maintain or your entries
in MAINTAINERS is incomplete.
In my case it is even worse: I didn't received any of the patches in
my mail-box despite being subscribed to the list.
As you'll probably have noticed, I'm doing some deep cleanup on
'imx-dma.c' file as you can see in the following patches:
[PATCH v2 1/2] dmaengine: Add support for MEMCPY for imx-dma.
[PATCH v3 2/2] dmaengine: Add support for multiple descriptors for imx-dma.
[PATCH 00/14] dmaengine: imx-dma: merge dma arch code into dmaengine.
Currently, I'm waiting for Sascha and Vinod to confirm that they are
fine and merge them. However, your series seems to conflict with those
patches as it modifies imx-dma.
I expect that whenever these patches get posted, there will be some kind
of conflict with some work going on somewhere else. There's not much
which can be done to get away from that.
On 6 March 2012 12:07, Russell King - ARM Linux [off-list ref] wrote:
On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 12:03:54PM +0100, javier Martin wrote:
quoted
Hi Russell,
I've just seen this series in the mailing list archives:
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2012-March/087917.html
As some people already stated, patch 1/9 is missing.
They weren't all sent to linux-arm-kernel - they were only sent to the
appropriate people listed in MAINTAINERS. ?So if you didn't receive them,
either the patch was not touching a driver you maintain or your entries
in MAINTAINERS is incomplete.
I'd like to have access to the patches in order to test them for the
imx and give you my tested-by.
quoted
In my case it is even worse: I didn't received any of the patches in
my mail-box despite being subscribed to the list.
As you'll probably have noticed, I'm doing some deep cleanup on
'imx-dma.c' file as you can see in the following patches:
[PATCH v2 1/2] dmaengine: Add support for MEMCPY for imx-dma.
[PATCH v3 2/2] dmaengine: Add support for multiple descriptors for imx-dma.
[PATCH 00/14] dmaengine: imx-dma: merge dma arch code into dmaengine.
Currently, I'm waiting for Sascha and Vinod to confirm that they are
fine and merge them. However, your series seems to conflict with those
patches as it modifies imx-dma.
I expect that whenever these patches get posted, there will be some kind
of conflict with some work going on somewhere else. ?There's not much
which can be done to get away from that.
Who would be in charge of solving the merge issues that may arise?
Would it be Vinod Koul, the dmaengine maintainer?
Regards.
--
Javier Martin
Vista Silicon S.L.
CDTUC - FASE C - Oficina S-345
Avda de los Castros s/n
39005- Santander. Cantabria. Spain
+34 942 25 32 60
www.vista-silicon.com