From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: andrew@lunn.ch (Andrew Lunn)
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2012 12:16:41 +0200
Subject: [PATCH 2/16] SPI: Refactor spi-orion to use SPI framework queue.
In-Reply-To: <20120723093747.GD4435@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
References: <1342805751-18048-1-git-send-email-andrew@lunn.ch>
 <1342805751-18048-3-git-send-email-andrew@lunn.ch>
 <CACRpkdYBJmh3+EVrPGb8L2TTWkJkeejfDZX1G0T1KoYY-YuBLg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20120722095328.GB5423@lunn.ch>
 <20120722190700.GD4557@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
 <20120722193243.GF5423@lunn.ch>
 <20120722224241.GH4557@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
 <20120723072749.GA18778@lunn.ch>
 <20120723093747.GD4435@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Message-ID: <20120723101641.GD18778@lunn.ch>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 10:37:47AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 09:27:49AM +0200, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> 
> > Will you accept any patches for this merge window? As you said, the DT
> > enablement is low risk. It should be possible to separate this one
> > patch from the other two.
> 
> Can you send the patches please?

I just sent the DT enabling patch. The other two, "Refactor spi-orion
to use SPI framework queue." and "remove uneeded spi_info" can wait
for the next merge window. For me, they are lower priority than
getting DT working.
 
> The bit I was saying was most low risk was the actual DT changes, as
> opposed to the bits that parse and use the DT.

Ah, O.K. I understood you wrongly. I actually think they are the most
dangerous part. A board booting with these DT changes, and without the
driver enablement for DT is likely to fail to find its root
filesystem.

Thanks
       Andrew