[GIT PULL] at91: move of AIC drivers for 3.17: fixes #1

[Olof Johansson]

On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 7:41 AM, Boris BREZILLON
<boris.brezillon at free-electrons.com> wrote:
> Hi Jason,
>
> On Fri, 15 Aug 2014 10:22:25 -0400
> Jason Cooper <jason at lakedaemon.net> wrote:
>
>> Nicolas,
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 05:45:56PM +0200, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
>> > Arnd, Olof, Kevin,
>> >
>> > Boris moved both of our AIC drivers to their new home: the drivers/irqchip
>> > directory taking advantage of the genirc framework. For DT-enabled SoCs, we can
>> > use these drivers (aic and aic5) right now: Jason merged them and they are
>> > available in early 3.17 merge window.
>> > So, I build this pull-request for enabling the use of these drivers now as:
>> > - we are very early in 3.17 development
>> > - it allowed us to avoid having to depend on Jason's branch before the opening
>> >   of the merge window
>>
>> Then why did I create a topic branch for you to base on?
>>
>>   git://git.infradead.org/users/jcooper/linux.git irqchip/atmel-aic
>
> Don't blame Nicolas for this, he was in vacation when you created this
> branch (he came back this week), and I should have told you that he
> couldn't use it for this release cycle.
>
>>
>> > - it removes some code from the mach-at91 directory: including the whole
>> >   aic5 driver
>> > - we'd have quite a bit of time to solve issues if we found a bug
>> > - the code is basically moved so it should be error free.
>>
>> Well, this is certainly up to Arnd, Olof and Kevin, but it seems a bit
>> unusual.  You're basically asking to merge changes into the current window
>> that has had _no_ time in -next...  Sounds like a recipe for trouble to
>> me.
>>
>> In the future, please let me know if you're not going to need a topic
>> branch.
>
> This is all my fault, I'm the one who asked Nicolas to get these patches
> merged in 3.17, and, as I said, I should have told you that he was in
> vacation and thus could not use your topic branch for this release
> cycle.
>
> Anyway, I understand your concern about merging stuff that have not been
> tested on linux-next.
>
> Arnd, Olof, Kevin, I'd totally understand if you refuses to takes these
> patches for this release cycle.

Yeah, this isn't 3.17 material at this time -- the merge window is
practically over. We'll be happy to queue it for 3.18 starting next
week.


-Olof