Pending patches for s5pc110

[Kyungmin Park]

On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 4:54 PM, Ben Dooks <ben-linux at fluff.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 04:07:58PM +0900, Kyungmin Park wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 3:23 PM, Ben Dooks <ben-linux at fluff.org> wrote:
>> > On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 02:38:56PM +0900, Kyungmin Park wrote:
>> >> On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 2:15 PM, Ben Dooks <ben-linux at fluff.org> wrote:
>> >> > On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 01:25:18PM +0900, Kyungmin Park wrote:
>> >> >> Hi,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> No comments mean it's okay then we will prepare the patches to git pull.
>> >> >
>> >> > No. no comments means that people either haven't had time to sort
>> >> > them out or in fact ON HOLIDAY.
>> >>
>> >> but you usually missed our patches frequently. with this reason our
>> >> patches can't merge within proper merge window.
>> >
>> > I belive the last set where either being posted just-before or during
>> > the last merge window. We already had far too much queueud up then and
>> > we where trying to ensure that the already-queued entries where processed.
>>
>> Not tell this case, please see the s5pc110 patches last year. last
>> year we sent the s5pc110 related patches several times. but you don't
>> give any opinions and can't accept without any reason.
>
> I gave you comments, or at least Marke should have got them for the
> series sent in November, then there's nothing in my mailbox since
> then.
>
>> Well it's past story,  forget it.
>>
>> Last question.
>>
>> I think you share the s3c maintainer-ship with Kukjin. Can you explain
>> the criteria?
>
> Ok, here's the list:
>
> 1) SystemLSI are the best placed to see all the chips in development,
>   since they're the ones making them. You are only dealing with a
>   subset of their output (generally the S5PC100 and S5PC110) whereas
>   there are many more devices in the line.
>
> 2) SystemLSI have spent time talking to me about what they need to do
>   when maintaining a system and trying to acquire the necessary skills
>   for managing a port.

That's enough.

>
> This does not mean that you cannot be included at a later date.
>
> As a note, that I have left myself in the maintainers entries for the
> samsung series and will re-visit this once we see how well the transfer
> goes in the next kernel release or two.

I see.

Just opinion I hope you're more focus on difficult issues such as
reserved memory handling at used
continuous memory management at multimedia IPs and clock & power
gating to reduce the power at Samsung SoCs.

Have good holiday.

Thank you,
Kyungmin Park