[PULL] at91 init factorize

[Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD]

On 23:42 Sun 31 Jul     , Nicolas Ferre wrote:
> On 07/31/2011 05:44 AM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> >On 14:39 Sat 30 Jul     , Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> >>On Sat, 30 Jul 2011, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> >>
> >>>On 17:58 Thu 28 Jul     , Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >>>>On Thursday 28 July 2011, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> >>>>>>The patches look good, but come at an inconvenient time. We're still
> >>>>>>in the merge window, so I don't want to add stuff to linux-next yet
> >>>>>>that is destined for 3.2, and I have already sent out all the arm-soc
> >>>>>>patches for the 3.1 merge window, so I don't really want to send another
> >>>>>>round of patches at the last minute.
> >>>>>this are waiting ofr 2 release already
> >>>>>
> >>>>>and was inthe next last release for more than 1 month
> >>>>>
> >>>>>can we have them merge this time
> >>>>
> >>>>What I don't understand at all is why you are waiting instead of sending
> >>>>a pull request for all that time then. I've repeatedly given announcements
> >>>>about the state of the arm-soc tree and asked people to send patches
> >>>>they want in 3.1, and you actually sent bug fixes that way earlier
> >>>>
> >>>>You've had more than enough time before the merge window, and would even
> >>>>have made an exception if you had sent your stuff a few hours earlier,
> >>>>before I sent everything to Linus.
> >>>>Also, the branch you sent me was created on the same day, meaning that
> >>>>it can't possibly have had a lot of testing (though it looks harmless
> >>>>enough). When you send a pull request, the patches should always be
> >>>>based on an -rc or main release to simplify the merge history, and
> >>>>it's better not to rebase to the latest one if you already have the
> >>>>patches.
> >>>sorry but those patch are 4 motnhs old and yes I rebase the branch to the
> >>>current linus tree before send the pull request.
> >>
> >>Please don't do that.  It is best if you keep the same branch content
> >>identical to what has been tested and validated for a while.
> >except I send time to retest it
> 
> Jean-Christophe,
> 
> There is nothing to say in addition:
> 1/ Arnd has been kind enough to pull those changes in his tree (even
> correcting little things)
> 2/ Arnd has been kind enough to send a late pull request to Linus
didn't see it
busy on the device cleanup to switch to the DT after

Arnd tks a lat

Best Regards,
J.