From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: Wolfram Sang <w.sang@pengutronix.de>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@canb.auug.org.au>,
Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-next@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>,
Alessandro Rubini <rubini@gnudd.com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@stericsson.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm-soc tree with the i2c-embedded tree
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 15:54:02 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201207121554.03240.arnd@arndb.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120712131231.GH2194@pengutronix.de>
On Thursday 12 July 2012, Wolfram Sang wrote:
>
> > I fixed it up (I think - see below) and can carry the fix as necessary.
> > Please check this and talk to each other ...
>
> I also noticed the bindings today [1]. They came in via a seperate
> patch (suboptimal) which has no ack by a devicetree maintainer which I'd
> really like to see here, because the bindings look suspicious to me.
> They look like they mostly export register settings which is usually
> questionable since we might want to abstract bindings so they can be
> useful for a number of drivers.
>
> Arnd, since you committed the patches, can you please comment? I'd
> prefer to drop this DT conversion for now, otherwise we might have to
> support this possibly rushed bindings forever? LinusW, what do you
> think?
I've dropped the ux500/dt branch for now. and will wait for a new one
to get submitted as a replacement. There were other things wrong with
the submission that Lee already knows about, so I think it's better
to do this the proper way now.
Arnd
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: arnd@arndb.de (Arnd Bergmann)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: linux-next: manual merge of the arm-soc tree with the i2c-embedded tree
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 15:54:02 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201207121554.03240.arnd@arndb.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120712131231.GH2194@pengutronix.de>
On Thursday 12 July 2012, Wolfram Sang wrote:
>
> > I fixed it up (I think - see below) and can carry the fix as necessary.
> > Please check this and talk to each other ...
>
> I also noticed the bindings today [1]. They came in via a seperate
> patch (suboptimal) which has no ack by a devicetree maintainer which I'd
> really like to see here, because the bindings look suspicious to me.
> They look like they mostly export register settings which is usually
> questionable since we might want to abstract bindings so they can be
> useful for a number of drivers.
>
> Arnd, since you committed the patches, can you please comment? I'd
> prefer to drop this DT conversion for now, otherwise we might have to
> support this possibly rushed bindings forever? LinusW, what do you
> think?
I've dropped the ux500/dt branch for now. and will wait for a new one
to get submitted as a replacement. There were other things wrong with
the submission that Lee already knows about, so I think it's better
to do this the proper way now.
Arnd
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-07-12 15:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 80+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-07-10 6:41 linux-next: manual merge of the arm-soc tree with the i2c-embedded tree Stephen Rothwell
2012-07-10 6:41 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-07-10 6:41 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-07-10 6:50 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-07-10 6:50 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-07-10 6:50 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-07-10 8:38 ` Wolfram Sang
2012-07-10 8:38 ` Wolfram Sang
2012-07-12 13:12 ` Wolfram Sang
2012-07-12 13:12 ` Wolfram Sang
2012-07-12 15:54 ` Arnd Bergmann [this message]
2012-07-12 15:54 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-07-13 11:03 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-13 11:03 ` Lee Jones
[not found] ` <20120712131231.GH2194-bIcnvbaLZ9MEGnE8C9+IrQ@public.gmane.org>
2012-07-14 21:34 ` Linus Walleij
2012-07-14 21:34 ` Linus Walleij
2012-07-14 21:34 ` Linus Walleij
2012-07-16 10:17 ` Wolfram Sang
2012-07-16 10:17 ` Wolfram Sang
2012-07-16 11:31 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-16 11:31 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-16 13:00 ` Wolfram Sang
2012-07-16 13:00 ` Wolfram Sang
2012-07-16 13:55 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-16 13:55 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-17 13:06 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-17 13:06 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-17 13:30 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-17 13:30 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-17 13:35 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-17 13:35 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-17 14:02 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-17 14:02 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-17 14:22 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-17 14:22 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-17 14:52 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-17 14:52 ` Lee Jones
[not found] ` <50057C1A.80606-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>
2012-07-17 15:20 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-17 15:20 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-17 15:20 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-18 5:33 ` Shawn Guo
2012-07-18 5:33 ` Shawn Guo
2012-07-18 5:33 ` Shawn Guo
2012-07-18 9:59 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-18 9:59 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-18 10:29 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-18 10:29 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-18 10:33 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-18 10:33 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-18 10:43 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-18 10:43 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-18 7:35 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-18 7:35 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-18 11:12 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-18 11:12 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-18 11:24 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-18 11:24 ` Lee Jones
2012-07-16 11:37 ` Linus Walleij
2012-07-16 11:37 ` Linus Walleij
2012-07-16 12:35 ` Wolfram Sang
2012-07-16 12:35 ` Wolfram Sang
[not found] ` <20120716123550.GE17435-bIcnvbaLZ9MEGnE8C9+IrQ@public.gmane.org>
2012-07-16 19:45 ` Linus Walleij
2012-07-16 19:45 ` Linus Walleij
2012-07-16 19:45 ` Linus Walleij
[not found] ` <CACRpkdaMB-n7XYcxE8QtAm-WrGc2DR0krfTjQZCbvOL1HYep1Q-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2012-07-16 20:04 ` Chris Ball
2012-07-16 20:04 ` Chris Ball
2012-07-16 20:04 ` Chris Ball
2012-07-17 13:10 ` Mark Brown
2012-07-17 13:10 ` Mark Brown
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2012-07-19 5:28 Stephen Rothwell
2012-07-19 5:28 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-07-19 5:28 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-09-13 6:41 Stephen Rothwell
2012-09-13 6:41 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-09-13 6:41 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-09-13 7:09 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2012-09-13 7:09 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2012-11-15 5:27 Stephen Rothwell
2012-11-15 5:27 ` Stephen Rothwell
2012-11-15 5:27 ` Stephen Rothwell
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=201207121554.03240.arnd@arndb.de \
--to=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=lee.jones@linaro.org \
--cc=linus.walleij@stericsson.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=olof@lixom.net \
--cc=rubini@gnudd.com \
--cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
--cc=w.sang@pengutronix.de \
/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.