[PATCHv5 00/11] MSI support for Marvell EBU PCIe driver
Thomas Petazzoni
thomas.petazzoni at free-electrons.com
Tue Jul 16 09:39:11 EDT 2013
Dear Jason Cooper,
On Tue, 16 Jul 2013 09:15:47 -0400, Jason Cooper wrote:
> > A quick diagram of the dependencies, best viewed with a fixed-size font
> > mailer.
> >
> > kernel/irq/irqdomain drivers/pci arch/arm/kernel
> > patch 1 patch 2, 3, 4 patch 8
> > || || ||
> > || \/ \/
> > || drivers/of ==> drivers/pci/host
> > || patch 5 patch 10
> > || ||
> > \\__________________//
> > ||
> > \/
> > drivers/irqchip
> > patch 6, 7
>
> Well, that got more complicated. :( No cookie for you.
Yeah, sorry about this. I'm not sure how to handle that differently.
> > Patches 9 and 11 are DT patches, so they are not mentioned in this
> > diagram.
> >
> > Normally tegra would require 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 8, so ideally, with
> > the respective maintainers ACKs, Jason Cooper could take them in a
> > specific topic stable branch that would not be rebased, on top of which
> > both the Marvell work and Tegra work could be done.
>
> After my recent discussions with tglx, here's my proposal:
>
> - rmk creates a dedicated topic branch with patch 8
>
> - Bjorn creates a dedicated topic branch based on rmk's with 2, 3, 4, 5,
> and 10
>
> - tglx creates a dedicated topic branch based on Bjorn's with 1, 6, 7
I am wondering if this merge strategy isn't too complicated to work
nicely. Would it be easier if one person took all of those patches in a
stable topic branch, with the ACKs from the proper maintainers?
But anyway, as long as things get merged, I don't really mind what
merge strategy is used, so I'll trust on what will be the best option
on this.
Thanks a lot for taking care of this!
Thomas
--
Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list