From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: andrew@lunn.ch (Andrew Lunn) Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2016 15:48:46 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 1/2] ARM: dts: kirkwood: split lswxl into linkstation lswsxl and lswxl In-Reply-To: References: <1453211342-25214-1-git-send-email-rogershimizu@gmail.com> <1453211342-25214-2-git-send-email-rogershimizu@gmail.com> <20160119140507.GG6554@lunn.ch> Message-ID: <20160119144846.GI6554@lunn.ch> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 11:15:35PM +0900, Roger Shimizu wrote: > On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 11:05 PM, Andrew Lunn wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 10:49:01PM +0900, Roger Shimizu wrote: > >> With a few gpio/led-pin changes, including fix for the issue mentioned > >> in Debian BTS #810894. > > > > Hi Roger > > > > This fix should be a separate patch. We can then get it applied to > > stable, so it makes its way back to older kernels. > > Dear Andrew, > > So this patchset would be reviewed or not? I will review it and give comments, but won't accept it. > Or I have to create another patchset including both fix for > "kirkwood-lswxl.dts" and the dts split? Yes please. And the fix patch should come first, and have a fixes: tag. As a general rule of thumb, it is better to have lots of small, easy to review patches, than an couple of big patch. So i would probably have: 1) Fix 2) License change. 3) Split patch LS-WXL/WSXL 4) Split patch LS-WVL/VL The license change needs a different sort of review to the other patches, so having it as a separate patch helps with the review process. Andrew