Hi,
On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 2:15 AM, Fabio Baltieri
[off-list ref] wrote:
Hello Arnd, Olof,
This contains a series of updates and fixes for the ste_dma40 driver.
The driver is specific for the ux500, and the patches were acked by both Linus
Walleij, and Vinod Koul (dmaengine), who agreed to push this through arm-soc.
Can you please pull those in for -next?
While I don't mind taking this through arm-soc, I don't see a strong
reason to do so?
This series of patches only modify the ste_dma40 driver, there are no
corresponding changes under arch/arm that need to be coordinated or
considered w.r.t. merge conflicts. I.e. they all seem nicely isolated
to only the driver.
So is there a specific reason for why these shouldn't just go in
through the dmaengine tree?
Thanks,
-Olof