[GIT PULL] [for 3.4] git pull request for arch-pxa

[Haojian Zhuang]

On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 11:16 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd at arndb.de> wrote:
> On Monday 27 February 2012, Haojian Zhuang wrote:
>> Please help to pull these patches for v3.4.
>>
>> The following changes since commit c38e23456278e967f094b08247ffc3711b1029b2:
>>
>>   i387: fix sense of sanity check (2012-02-15 08:05:18 -0800)
>>
>> are available in the git repository at:
>>   git://github.com/hzhuang1/linux.git for-next
>>
>> Haojian Zhuang (7):
>>       rtc: sa1100: remove periodic code
>>       rtc: sa1100: remove verification code of alarm
>>       rtc: sa1100: declare irq in resource
>>       ARM: pxa: add rtc dummy clock
>>       rtc: sa1100: enable clk support
>>       ARM: mmp: enable rtc in pxa910
>>       ARM: mmp: append irq name of gpio device
>>
>> Jett.Zhou (1):
>>       ARM: sa1100: clean up clock support
>>
>> Paul Parsons (4):
>>       pxa/hx4700: Correct StrataFlash block size discovery
>>       pxa/hx4700: Add ASIC3 LED support
>>       pxa/hx4700: Fix PXA_GPIO_IRQ_BASE/IRQ_NUM values
>>       pxa/hx4700: Fix basic suspend/resume
>
> Hi Haojian,
>
> Please follow the same rules for arm-soc pull requests as everyone
> else. In particular, don't rebase your patches on a random changeset
> for Linus but use an -rc tag as the base isntead, and split your
> patches into topic branches:
>
> The rtc changes clearly belong into one branch, while the cleanup
> and hx4700 changes do not. I would suggest sending three pull
> requests, one for cleanup, rtc and board specific changes.
> Ideally, the first two patches from the rtc series ("remove periodic
> code" and "remove verification code of alarm") would be in both
> the rtc series and the cleanup branch.
>
>        Arnd

Does it mean that I should let the same commit exist in two branch if
there's code dependancy?