From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kukjin Kim Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Samsung SoC EXYNOS5250 arch for v3.4 Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2012 13:30:22 -0700 Message-ID: <4F63A2DE.7070705@samsung.com> References: <4F61FA0D.1050007@samsung.com> <201203161250.11353.arnd@arndb.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-pz0-f46.google.com ([209.85.210.46]:53025 "EHLO mail-pz0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030320Ab2CPUaZ (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Mar 2012 16:30:25 -0400 Received: by dajr28 with SMTP id r28so6593601daj.19 for ; Fri, 16 Mar 2012 13:30:25 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <201203161250.11353.arnd@arndb.de> Sender: linux-samsung-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Kukjin Kim , 'Olof Johansson' , "linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" Arnd Bergmann wrote: [...] > > As you may have noticed from Stephen's notification about the merge > conflict, I have put this into the next/soc2 branch now. > Yes, thanks. > I'm not too happy with the resolution of my comments, but in the Hmm, sorry about that. > end I think it's better to have it in the tree than not have it. > While you did reply with explanations for why some of the patches > were necessary, you did not actually put the explanations into > the changeset descriptions but only sent a reply to my emails. Oh, I see. If similar case will happen next time, let me expand its descritpions. > > I don't think that the merge conflict is problematic, especially > since Linus won't see the same thing that Stephen did, but as I > wrote in the other mail, please check that my resolution was correct. > Yes, as I replied, I think your resolution and Stehpehn's one, both are correct to me and just different postion of 'int ret'. As a note, I just fixed it up with yours. Thanks. Best regards, Kgene. -- Kukjin Kim , Senior Engineer, SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: kgene.kim@samsung.com (Kukjin Kim) Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2012 13:30:22 -0700 Subject: [GIT PULL] Samsung SoC EXYNOS5250 arch for v3.4 In-Reply-To: <201203161250.11353.arnd@arndb.de> References: <4F61FA0D.1050007@samsung.com> <201203161250.11353.arnd@arndb.de> Message-ID: <4F63A2DE.7070705@samsung.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Arnd Bergmann wrote: [...] > > As you may have noticed from Stephen's notification about the merge > conflict, I have put this into the next/soc2 branch now. > Yes, thanks. > I'm not too happy with the resolution of my comments, but in the Hmm, sorry about that. > end I think it's better to have it in the tree than not have it. > While you did reply with explanations for why some of the patches > were necessary, you did not actually put the explanations into > the changeset descriptions but only sent a reply to my emails. Oh, I see. If similar case will happen next time, let me expand its descritpions. > > I don't think that the merge conflict is problematic, especially > since Linus won't see the same thing that Stephen did, but as I > wrote in the other mail, please check that my resolution was correct. > Yes, as I replied, I think your resolution and Stehpehn's one, both are correct to me and just different postion of 'int ret'. As a note, I just fixed it up with yours. Thanks. Best regards, Kgene. -- Kukjin Kim , Senior Engineer, SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.