Request to include Mailbox tree in linux-next

Jassi Brar jaswinder.singh at
Fri Aug 8 07:33:01 PDT 2014

On 8 August 2014 16:00, Russell King - ARM Linux <linux at> wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 02:29:12PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
>> Hi Jassi,
>> On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 12:25:49 +0530 Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh at> wrote:
>> >
>> >  The framework for Mailbox has undergone 10 revisions over the last
>> > one year, which has garnered support in the form of 'Reviewed-by' and
>> > 'looks good enough to be merged in this window' from people in the CC
>> > list.
>> >
>> >   Could you please add it to linux-next?
>> > Tree:       git://
>> > Branch:   mailbox-for-3.17
>> > Contact:  Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh at>
>> This is really late for v3.17.  The purpose of linux-next is to
>> discover interactions between trees before they are pulled into Linus'
>> tree and to do some cross architecture build checking.  Adding a tree
>> during the merge window is not very helpful to that.
> +1.
> The same goes for any tree which is part of linux-next.
> Having a tree in linux-next carries with it the responsibility that the
> tree owner abides by the kernel development cycle, which includes
> respecting the moratorium on merging new development into branch(es)
> which are part of linux-next during an actively open merge window.
I wasn't aware that any new subsystem must live at least one cycle in
linux-next, I submitted it for inclusion just because someone
suggested that as the next best thing to merging this cycle.


More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list