From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: Adding remoteproc/rpmsg to linux-next Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2012 16:57:36 +0000 Message-ID: <201202011657.36998.arnd@arndb.de> References: <201112221522.21146.arnd@arndb.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.17.8]:49674 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751209Ab2BAQ6P (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Feb 2012 11:58:15 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Ohad Ben-Cohen Cc: linux-arm , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, Grant Likely , Brian Swetland , akpm@linux-foundation.org, Greg KH , Stephen Boyd , Mark Brown , Rusty Russell , Russell King , Tony Lindgren , Saravana Kannan , Stephen Rothwell , Linus Walleij On Wednesday 01 February 2012, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote: > On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 5:22 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > If you think you need more Acks or if there are other > > reasons to have it go through arm-soc, please tell me and I'll try harder > > to find the time for a proper review. > > Any chance you could carve out some time for reviewing remoteproc and > rpmsg [1] ? I will. > I hope we could either get your Acks on the patches or even have it go > through arm-soc for 3.4. Yes, I think it's best to have it merged through arm-soc, in case Linus is more likely to take it from there than pull from your tree. Arnd From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: arnd@arndb.de (Arnd Bergmann) Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2012 16:57:36 +0000 Subject: Adding remoteproc/rpmsg to linux-next In-Reply-To: References: <201112221522.21146.arnd@arndb.de> Message-ID: <201202011657.36998.arnd@arndb.de> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wednesday 01 February 2012, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote: > On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 5:22 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > If you think you need more Acks or if there are other > > reasons to have it go through arm-soc, please tell me and I'll try harder > > to find the time for a proper review. > > Any chance you could carve out some time for reviewing remoteproc and > rpmsg [1] ? I will. > I hope we could either get your Acks on the patches or even have it go > through arm-soc for 3.4. Yes, I think it's best to have it merged through arm-soc, in case Linus is more likely to take it from there than pull from your tree. Arnd