From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mailout4.samsung.com ([203.254.224.34]:25536 "EHLO mailout4.samsung.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752262Ab3FXCwS (ORCPT ); Sun, 23 Jun 2013 22:52:18 -0400 From: Jingoo Han To: 'Bjorn Helgaas' , 'Thomas Petazzoni' Cc: 'Arnd Bergmann' , 'Jason Cooper' , 'Kukjin Kim' , linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, 'Grant Likely' , 'Andrew Murray' , 'Thierry Reding' , 'Jason Gunthorpe' , 'Surendranath Gurivireddy Balla' , 'Siva Reddy Kallam' , 'Thomas Abraham' , 'Tomasz Figa' , 'Pratyush Anand' , 'Mohit KUMAR' , Jingoo Han References: <003901ce6e50$03d039a0$0b70ace0$@samsung.com> <201306211030.47440.arnd@arndb.de> <20130621141144.GP31667@titan.lakedaemon.net> <201306211614.49434.arnd@arndb.de> In-reply-to: <201306211614.49434.arnd@arndb.de> Subject: Re: [PATCH V10 0/4] PCIe support for Samsung Exynos5440 SoC Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 11:52:10 +0900 Message-id: <007201ce7085$d2c4fed0$784efc70$@samsung.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-pci-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Friday, June 21, 2013 11:15 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Friday 21 June 2013, Jason Cooper wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 10:30:47AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > On Friday 21 June 2013, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > > > > I am by far not an expert on how to solve merge strategies and so on, > > > > but to avoid conflicts at Linus's level while merging the arm-soc and > > > > pci trees, it would be better if this Samsung PCIe driver could go > > > > through arm-soc (with Bjorn ACK, of course), so that Arnd/Olof can > > > > make sure the ordering is correct with regard to the of/pci changes and > > > > the mvebu/pci driver. Yes, right. That is the reason why I based on 'linu-next' tree, instead of 'PCI' -next branch. Bjorn Helgaas, Could you give your ACK? Thank you. Best regards, Jingoo Han > > > > > > Yes, good point. > > > > > > The alternative would be that Bjorn also takes the PCI branch dependencies > > > that are already in arm-soc into his tree. Either way works, but I agree > > > that what you suggest would be simpler. > > > > Yes, that is why we did it this way. It was my understanding based on > > previous comments by yourself and LinusW that you both had patches > > depending on (now called) mvebu/of_pci. So we got it into arm-soc > > early so those branches could depend on it. > > Right. I wasn't paying enough attention for the early merges that > Olof did. > > Arnd From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jingoo Han Subject: Re: [PATCH V10 0/4] PCIe support for Samsung Exynos5440 SoC Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 11:52:10 +0900 Message-ID: <007201ce7085$d2c4fed0$784efc70$@samsung.com> References: <003901ce6e50$03d039a0$0b70ace0$@samsung.com> <201306211030.47440.arnd@arndb.de> <20130621141144.GP31667@titan.lakedaemon.net> <201306211614.49434.arnd@arndb.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-reply-to: <201306211614.49434.arnd-r2nGTMty4D4@public.gmane.org> Content-language: ko List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org Sender: "devicetree-discuss" To: 'Bjorn Helgaas' , 'Thomas Petazzoni' Cc: 'Siva Reddy Kallam' , 'Jason Gunthorpe' , linux-samsung-soc-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, 'Jason Cooper' , 'Surendranath Gurivireddy Balla' , linux-pci-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org, 'Thierry Reding' , linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, 'Kukjin Kim' , 'Mohit KUMAR' , Jingoo Han , 'Andrew Murray' , 'Pratyush Anand' , linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org On Friday, June 21, 2013 11:15 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Friday 21 June 2013, Jason Cooper wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 10:30:47AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > On Friday 21 June 2013, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > > > > I am by far not an expert on how to solve merge strategies and so on, > > > > but to avoid conflicts at Linus's level while merging the arm-soc and > > > > pci trees, it would be better if this Samsung PCIe driver could go > > > > through arm-soc (with Bjorn ACK, of course), so that Arnd/Olof can > > > > make sure the ordering is correct with regard to the of/pci changes and > > > > the mvebu/pci driver. Yes, right. That is the reason why I based on 'linu-next' tree, instead of 'PCI' -next branch. Bjorn Helgaas, Could you give your ACK? Thank you. Best regards, Jingoo Han > > > > > > Yes, good point. > > > > > > The alternative would be that Bjorn also takes the PCI branch dependencies > > > that are already in arm-soc into his tree. Either way works, but I agree > > > that what you suggest would be simpler. > > > > Yes, that is why we did it this way. It was my understanding based on > > previous comments by yourself and LinusW that you both had patches > > depending on (now called) mvebu/of_pci. So we got it into arm-soc > > early so those branches could depend on it. > > Right. I wasn't paying enough attention for the early merges that > Olof did. > > Arnd From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jg1.han@samsung.com (Jingoo Han) Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 11:52:10 +0900 Subject: [PATCH V10 0/4] PCIe support for Samsung Exynos5440 SoC In-Reply-To: <201306211614.49434.arnd@arndb.de> References: <003901ce6e50$03d039a0$0b70ace0$@samsung.com> <201306211030.47440.arnd@arndb.de> <20130621141144.GP31667@titan.lakedaemon.net> <201306211614.49434.arnd@arndb.de> Message-ID: <007201ce7085$d2c4fed0$784efc70$@samsung.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Friday, June 21, 2013 11:15 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Friday 21 June 2013, Jason Cooper wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 10:30:47AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > On Friday 21 June 2013, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > > > > I am by far not an expert on how to solve merge strategies and so on, > > > > but to avoid conflicts at Linus's level while merging the arm-soc and > > > > pci trees, it would be better if this Samsung PCIe driver could go > > > > through arm-soc (with Bjorn ACK, of course), so that Arnd/Olof can > > > > make sure the ordering is correct with regard to the of/pci changes and > > > > the mvebu/pci driver. Yes, right. That is the reason why I based on 'linu-next' tree, instead of 'PCI' -next branch. Bjorn Helgaas, Could you give your ACK? Thank you. Best regards, Jingoo Han > > > > > > Yes, good point. > > > > > > The alternative would be that Bjorn also takes the PCI branch dependencies > > > that are already in arm-soc into his tree. Either way works, but I agree > > > that what you suggest would be simpler. > > > > Yes, that is why we did it this way. It was my understanding based on > > previous comments by yourself and LinusW that you both had patches > > depending on (now called) mvebu/of_pci. So we got it into arm-soc > > early so those branches could depend on it. > > Right. I wasn't paying enough attention for the early merges that > Olof did. > > Arnd