From: arnd@arndb.de (Arnd Bergmann)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [GIT PULL] at91: fixes for 4.4 #1
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 20:36:47 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4698828.tp5rD5DIKm@wuerfel> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <564E0A99.9020707@atmel.com>
On Thursday 19 November 2015 18:44:57 Nicolas Ferre wrote:
> Le 19/11/2015 16:22, Arnd Bergmann a ?crit :
> > On Tuesday 17 November 2015 12:35:58 Nicolas Ferre wrote:
> >> Arnd, Olof, Kevin,
> >>
> >> This is the first "fixes" pull-request for AT91. I tried to collect little
> >> patches that didn't make it for -rc1.
> >> It can be due to synchronization between trees like the addition of some
> >> sama5d2 Xplained nodes (MFD tree) or the change of the watchdog compatible
> >> string for sama5d4 (watchdog tree).
> >> It can also be due to trivial cleanups that were spotted or submitted late like
> >> the replacement of "wakeup" properties or removal of unneeded defconfig option.
> >> The removal of some dead legacy DT properties or nodes is, in my opinion worth
> >> it as well in order to prevent us from abusive cut'n paste.
> >> NAND and ISI Atmel MAINTAINERS entries are also updated.
> >>
> >> Tell me if it's okay for you.
> >
> > I'd be happier to get the patches late in the process and then push back
> > myself than to get them as fixes, there was really no reason to wait
> > for the merge window to end with the ones that you already had.
>
> I thought than having a precise milestone as a base for this
> pull-request would be preferred.
It is, but if you have a branch that introduces or exposes a bug,
then I'd prefer to get a pull request with the bug fixes on top
of the branch that we already have, e.g. the at91/dt branch
(as opposed to next/dt or for-next, which would be wrong).
Arnd
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@atmel.com>
Cc: Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>,
arm@kernel.org, Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com>,
Boris BREZILLON <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>,
Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@jcrosoft.com>,
Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@atmel.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] at91: fixes for 4.4 #1
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 20:36:47 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4698828.tp5rD5DIKm@wuerfel> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <564E0A99.9020707@atmel.com>
On Thursday 19 November 2015 18:44:57 Nicolas Ferre wrote:
> Le 19/11/2015 16:22, Arnd Bergmann a écrit :
> > On Tuesday 17 November 2015 12:35:58 Nicolas Ferre wrote:
> >> Arnd, Olof, Kevin,
> >>
> >> This is the first "fixes" pull-request for AT91. I tried to collect little
> >> patches that didn't make it for -rc1.
> >> It can be due to synchronization between trees like the addition of some
> >> sama5d2 Xplained nodes (MFD tree) or the change of the watchdog compatible
> >> string for sama5d4 (watchdog tree).
> >> It can also be due to trivial cleanups that were spotted or submitted late like
> >> the replacement of "wakeup" properties or removal of unneeded defconfig option.
> >> The removal of some dead legacy DT properties or nodes is, in my opinion worth
> >> it as well in order to prevent us from abusive cut'n paste.
> >> NAND and ISI Atmel MAINTAINERS entries are also updated.
> >>
> >> Tell me if it's okay for you.
> >
> > I'd be happier to get the patches late in the process and then push back
> > myself than to get them as fixes, there was really no reason to wait
> > for the merge window to end with the ones that you already had.
>
> I thought than having a precise milestone as a base for this
> pull-request would be preferred.
It is, but if you have a branch that introduces or exposes a bug,
then I'd prefer to get a pull request with the bug fixes on top
of the branch that we already have, e.g. the at91/dt branch
(as opposed to next/dt or for-next, which would be wrong).
Arnd
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-11-19 19:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-11-17 11:35 [GIT PULL] at91: fixes for 4.4 #1 Nicolas Ferre
2015-11-17 11:35 ` Nicolas Ferre
2015-11-19 15:22 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-11-19 15:22 ` Arnd Bergmann
2015-11-19 17:44 ` Nicolas Ferre
2015-11-19 17:44 ` Nicolas Ferre
2015-11-19 19:36 ` Arnd Bergmann [this message]
2015-11-19 19:36 ` Arnd Bergmann
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=4698828.tp5rD5DIKm@wuerfel \
--to=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/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.