[patch 0/4] ARM: OMAP: Add clocksource and clockevent driver for OMAP

[patch 0/4] ARM: OMAP: Add clocksource and clockevent driver for OMAP

[Dirk Behme]

Hi,

the following patches add clocksource and clockevent driver
for ARM based TI OMAP devices.

They are against linux-2.6.19 + patch-2.6.20-rc1 +
patch-2.6.20-rc1-rt0. The clocksource patch went through
several review cycles on OMAP list.

Dirk

Re: [patch 0/4] ARM: OMAP: Add clocksource and clockevent driver for OMAP

[Theodore Tso]

On Wed, Dec 20, 2006 at 10:17:59AM +0100, Dirk Behme wrote:
> 
> the following patches add clocksource and clockevent driver
> for ARM based TI OMAP devices.
> 
> They are against linux-2.6.19 + patch-2.6.20-rc1 +
> patch-2.6.20-rc1-rt0. The clocksource patch went through
> several review cycles on OMAP list.

Hi Dirk,

	As a suggestion, could you consider sending patches to
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org?  One of the reasons why we (in
consultation with folks like Ingo and tglx) deliberatly didn't create
a RT development list was that in order to promote getting -rt related
patches into mainline as soon as possible, we wanted to keep patch and
development discussion on LKML.  For example, it's not clear that the
ARM maintainer subscribes to linux-rt-users; furthermore the more
patch discussion happens on LKML, it helps promote willingness of
other kernel developers that CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT isn't going to go away,
and will probably (hopefully!) be merged into mainline someday soon.

	Regards,

						- Ted

Re: [patch 0/4] ARM: OMAP: Add clocksource and clockevent driver for OMAP

[Dirk Behme]

Theodore Tso wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 20, 2006 at 10:17:59AM +0100, Dirk Behme wrote:
> 
>>the following patches add clocksource and clockevent driver
>>for ARM based TI OMAP devices.
>>
>>They are against linux-2.6.19 + patch-2.6.20-rc1 +
>>patch-2.6.20-rc1-rt0. The clocksource patch went through
>>several review cycles on OMAP list.
> 
> 
> Hi Dirk,
> 
> 	As a suggestion, could you consider sending patches to
> linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org?  One of the reasons why we (in
> consultation with folks like Ingo and tglx) deliberatly didn't create
> a RT development list was that in order to promote getting -rt related
> patches into mainline as soon as possible, we wanted to keep patch and
> development discussion on LKML.  For example, it's not clear that the
> ARM maintainer subscribes to linux-rt-users; furthermore the more
> patch discussion happens on LKML, it helps promote willingness of
> other kernel developers that CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT isn't going to go away,
> and will probably (hopefully!) be merged into mainline someday soon.

Many thanks for this clarification! Yes, I will see to find 
some time to send the patches to LKML.

I will check as well if parts of your quite good explanation 
above will fit into rt wiki.

Cheers

Dirk