[GIT PULL] Renesas SoC Clock Cleanups for v3.1

Olof Johansson olof at lixom.net
Wed May 21 13:53:08 PDT 2014

On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 03:01:45PM +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> On 05/20/2014 07:38 AM, Olof Johansson wrote:
> >On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 05:03:41PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> >>Hi Olof, Hi Kevin, Hi Arnd,
> >>
> >>Please consider these Renesas SoC Clock Cleanups for v3.16.
> >>
> >>This pull request is based a merge of the following to provide dependencies
> >>and avoid conflicts.
> >>
> >>* Renesas ARM Based SoC Board Updates for v3.16,
> >>   tagged as renesas-boards-for-v3.16, which you have already pulled.
> >>
> >>* Renesas ARM Based SoC Clock Updates for v3.16,
> >>   tagged as renesas-clock-for-v3.16, which you have already pulled.
> >>
> >>* The cmt-mtu2-tmu-cleanups-for-v3.16 branch of
> >>   Daniel Lezcano's tree.
> >>
> >>   git://git.linaro.org/people/daniel.lezcano/linux.git clockevents/cmt-mtu2-tmu-cleanups
> >
> >Daniel, I don't think we were part of a three-way handshake on this. Is
> >this branch 100% guaranteed to be stable between now and when Linus will
> >merge it, i.e. it will never be rebased? If so, we can pull in a copy
> >of it. If not, well, that'll get difficult.
> Hi Olof,
> actually, it is a common branch between Simon and I.

Ok, great.

> The branch clockevents/cmt-mtu2-tmu-cleanups contains Laurent's
> changes which was pulled into Simon's branch as described above.
> This branch has been merged into my clockevents/3.16 branch which
> will be pulled by Thomas into tip/timers/core.
> Nobody else should pull from clockevents/cmt-mtu2-tmu-cleanups IIUC.
> In any case, clockevents/cmt-mtu2-tmu-cleanups won't be changed
> until they are pulled.

Well, we prefer to bring in dependencies like these explicitly. Since Simon has
the branch in the pull request he sent, we prefer to keep a copy of it around
for tracking purposes.

> It is the second time I use this procedure, I could have missed
> something but I believe I applied it carefully.
> Let me know if you think something is wrong.

Everythign seems fine. It's just that we've been burnt before by other
maintainers rebasing a branch that someone else has pulled in, and all hell
breaking lose. Because of that we make sure that there's the three-way
handshake about this (us, you and Simon).



More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list