On Thursday 04 September 2014, Mike Turquette wrote:

Quoting Arnd Bergmann (2014-09-03 12:33:31)

quoted

On Wednesday 03 September 2014 11:49:56 Mike Turquette wrote:

quoted

quoted

Right, makes sense. We have in the past done it either way for other
platforms. When merging the patches through the clk subsystem, it still
makes sense to let us know of those plans and ask for an Ack from
the arm-soc maintainers, to be sure we can plan ahead in case there
are other (conflicting) patch sets that are sent through arm-soc.

Do I have your Ack for the arch/arm patches?

[0] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/[off-list ref]

I have no objection to the change, but we might need to be careful in
case we get a lot of conflicts.

How about making it a shared branch that you plan to send upstream
but that we can also include in arm-soc to avoid conflicts if necessary?

Sounds good. I'll probably need to perform a bit of surgery on my tree
and rebase it in order to have the minimum set of patches that get
pulled into arm-soc.

Ok, I see. We might not pull it in right away, because it's possible that there
are no actual conflicts and we don't need them, but it's definitely good
if your branch is ready in case we do.

	Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html