From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Guan Xuetao <gxt@mprc.pku.edu.cn>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] UniCore32 ISA support for linux-2.6
Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2011 20:11:34 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201102122011.34664.arnd@arndb.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTim99mRGrMa+n+2AiOXPuf6-xM-dcELUGX0ssMpP@mail.gmail.com>
On Saturday 12 February 2011 18:51:32 Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 5:32 PM, Guan Xuetao <gxt@mprc.pku.edu.cn> wrote:
> > Hi Linus,
> > Could you please pull from:
> > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/epip/linux-2.6-unicore32.git for_linus
> > to add unicore32 support for linux-2.6.
>
> I'm not going to do it during the 38 cycle, but if this has has gotten
> ack's from people like Arnd, and all the commentary from other people
> (like the "the ptrace.c file looks like it was copied from arm, wants
> attribution" etc), I can pull it in the 39 cycle.
I think it should still be posted once more to linux-arch/linux-kernel
as emails. I gave an Acked-by to a number of patches that are
harmless and that I didn't have any comments on.
There are a number of patches that I reviewed more thoroughly, and
Guan did a good job of cleaning up the code based on that. I believe
it's basically good to go into 2.6.39 once they go over the mailing
list in the current version. I'll reply with a Reviewed-by tag to the
patches that I reviewed and that now look ok when that happens.
There are a few remaining issues from the review, which can probably
be addressed in a later version. For instance, I suggested the use
of a flattened device tree for enumerating the nondiscoverable
SoC devices, which should help long-term maintainance, but is not
essential.
I should probably have been clearer about the timing for merging.
While I must have mentioned it at some point, there were a lot of
things I needed to explain about the process, so it probably
got lost.
> Arnd - who else was involved in the reviews? Is there somebody who
> should have been involved and wasn't?
A few people commented on specific patches, but I don't think anyone
besides me looked at all of it. Greg and others reviewed the
device drivers, so I did not bother with those.
I don't know enough about the signal handling code to do a good review,
and I tried to get Al Viro involved at some point, but didn't get his
attention.
Arnd
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-02-12 19:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-02-12 1:32 [GIT PULL] UniCore32 ISA support for linux-2.6 Guan Xuetao
2011-02-12 17:51 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-02-12 19:11 ` Arnd Bergmann [this message]
2011-02-13 2:30 ` Guan Xuetao
2011-02-13 1:51 ` Guan Xuetao
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-03-17 1:30 Guan Xuetao
2011-03-17 1:30 ` Guan Xuetao
2011-03-17 8:58 ` Arnd Bergmann
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=201102122011.34664.arnd@arndb.de \
--to=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=gxt@mprc.pku.edu.cn \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.