From: Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] Pull request for u-boot-arm -> u-boot?
Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 20:54:50 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201405052054.50260.marex@denx.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140505184034.GR22182@bill-the-cat>
On Monday, May 05, 2014 at 08:40:34 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 12:15:50PM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
> > On 05/05/2014 11:59 AM, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> > > On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 1:46 PM, Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>
wrote:
> > >> Albert,
> > >>
> > >> I was wondering when the next pull request for u-boot-arm/master ->
> > >> u-boot/master was likely to be?
> > >>
> > >> I asked because some changes to the Tegra USB driver went through the
> > >> u-boot-tegra/master and hence are now in u-boot-arm/master, but not in
> > >> u-boot-usb/master. I have some more USB driver changes which rely on
> > >> the earlier USB patches, and these should really go through
> > >> u-boot-usb/master rather than the Tegra/ARM tree. For this to happen,
> > >> u-boot-usb/master needs to contain the patches currently in
> > >> u-boot-arm/master, and the best way for that to happen is for those
> > >> patches to get into u-boot/master so that u-boot-usb/master can merge
> > >> them.
> > >>
> > >> Or, should Marek just merge u-boot-arm/master into his tree directly?
> > >
> > > Or should we have a 'u-boot-next' tree using the same concept as the
> > > kernel 'linux-next'?
> >
> > Having a u-boot-next won't solve this particular problem in any way.
> >
> > Having a u-boot-next allows any end-developer to develop on top of the
> > combined code in all trees, thus detecting/avoiding any conflicts with
> > them.
> >
> > However, my issue above is that a patch that's already applied in tree A
> > needs to make its way into tree B, so that further patches can be
> > *applied* in tree B. This is all about applying patches, not developing
> > patches. The existence (or not) of a u-boot-next tree doesn't affect
> > this issue at all.
>
> This is in fact a usual problem in Linux land where it seems like we
> have much more stringent rules on how things can go in. So long as
> people can collect the needed acks, I'm fine pulling things that touch a
> few areas into master.
The problem here is that I cannot apply the USB patches from Stephen until
Albert gets his stuff into U-Boot/master, which I would then merge back into
mine. Only then I can apply the USB patches. So we're waiting for Albert ...
Best regards,
Marek Vasut
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-05-05 18:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-05-05 16:46 [U-Boot] Pull request for u-boot-arm -> u-boot? Stephen Warren
2014-05-05 17:46 ` Marek Vasut
2014-05-09 8:39 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2014-05-05 17:46 ` Tom Rini
2014-05-09 9:57 ` Albert ARIBAUD
2014-05-05 17:59 ` Fabio Estevam
2014-05-05 18:12 ` Otavio Salvador
2014-05-05 18:53 ` Marek Vasut
2014-05-05 18:15 ` Stephen Warren
2014-05-05 18:40 ` Tom Rini
2014-05-05 18:52 ` Stephen Warren
2014-05-05 18:54 ` Marek Vasut [this message]
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=201405052054.50260.marex@denx.de \
--to=marex@denx.de \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.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.