[GIT PULL] Renesas ARM-based SoC v3.9
olof at lixom.net
Wed Jan 23 22:35:23 EST 2013
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 1:19 AM, Paul Mundt <lethal at linux-sh.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 12:21:23AM -0800, Olof Johansson wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 04:31:43PM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
>> > Sure, we could push 1-6 through the ARM tree, wait until it reaches mainline,
>> > then push 7 through the pinctrl tree, wait until it reaches mainline, push 8
>> > through the SH tree and 9 through the ARM tree, wait until they reach
>> > mainline, and finally push 10 through the pinctrl tree again. We could even
>> > push each branch through the tree it belongs to, but I doubt we'll be able to
>> > push everything during a single merge window.
>> Ah, ok -- you're suggesting bringing it _all_ in through arm-soc. We
>> can do so, I was of the initial impression from Simon's cover letter
>> that the arch/sh branches would also go through the SH tree.
>> This seems to be a particularly hairy conversion, given that it touches two
>> architectures that need to be updated in lockstep. I guess we might be just as
>> well off pulling it in as-is (with below exceptions) to get it in.
>> If you need the same contents in the SH tree due to dependencies and
>> later development, let me know and we can agree on a stable branch that
>> we both pick up in either tree that has all contents.
> There isn't anything at the moment pending for the SH tree that cares
> about or conflicts with any of this work, so it's ok with me if this all
> goes through arm-soc. If there is any fallout we can take care of it
> later on in the merge window. This would seem to be a saner option than
> attempting to merge half a dozen branches with dependencies on each other
> in precise order, which doesn't leave a lot of time for fixing up
> any residual merge window damage.
Yup, that sounds good. Let's do it that way.
More information about the linux-arm-kernel