[GIT PULL 2/2] Samsung fixes-2 for v4.0

[Lukasz Majewski]

Hi Kukjin,

> Lukasz Majewski wrote:
> > 
> > Hi Eduardo,
> > 
> > > On Fri, Mar 06, 2015 at 07:16:53PM +0900, Kukjin Kim wrote:
> > > > Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > + Eduardo
> > > >
> > > > Hi Arnd,
> > > >
> > > > > On Tuesday 03 March 2015 04:00:14 Kukjin Kim wrote:
> > > > > > Please pull Samsung tmu and hdmi regression fixes for v4.0
> > > > > > and I know this is quite big for fixes but I couldn't
> > > > > > handle this series for previous merge window because of
> > > > > > dependency with driver side...sorry for that and please
> > > > > > pull so that we could support them in v4.0 on exynos
> > > > > > platforms.
> > > > >
> > > > > What kind of dependency do you have there? It really should
> > > > > not be necessary to wait for driver changes, unless you do an
> > > > > incompatible DT binding change, which you should avoid.
> > > > >
> > > > For TMU patches, I've asked Eduardo to provide topic branch for
> > > > 'include/dt-bindings/thermal/thermal_exynos.h' has been added
> > > > via thermal tree because if I can't apply the patch in Samsung
> > > > tree for arm-soc, kernel build breakage will be happened. But I
> > > > couldn't get Eduardo's topic branch.
> > >
> > >
> > > Specifically, the developer, while migrating the driver to
> > > support DT and OF thermal, decided to create a header with
> > > constants. The header is used by DT files and the driver code.
> > > The header was the dependency.
> > 
> > Just my 2 cents :-).
> > 
> > The above situation is the justification for adding the whole patch
> > set to one repository when all ACKs are collected for it.
> > 
> I don't think so, even your series can be upstreamed though, other
> useless merge conflicts would be happened so we decided all of DT
> should be handled in arch side not driver side. So please don't argue
> about that.

Ok, I will not :-)

> 
> - Kukjin
> 



-- 
Best regards,

Lukasz Majewski

Samsung R&D Institute Poland (SRPOL) | Linux Platform Group