From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alex Courbot Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] gpio: remove GENERIC_GPIO completely Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2013 08:24:59 -0700 Message-ID: <5155B24B.2030601@nvidia.com> References: <1364562678-8945-1-git-send-email-acourbot@nvidia.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from hqemgate04.nvidia.com ([216.228.121.35]:11062 "EHLO hqemgate04.nvidia.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754908Ab3C2PVN (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Mar 2013 11:21:13 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1364562678-8945-1-git-send-email-acourbot@nvidia.com> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Alexandre Courbot Cc: Grant Likely , Linus Walleij , Arnd Bergmann , Romain Naour , "linux-arch@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" On 03/29/2013 06:11 AM, Alexandre Courbot wrote: > If I can get a few acks on these (or at least the first two ones) I'd like to > include them into my next branch as soon as possible so points of breakage can > be fixed. There are indeed a few new users of GENERIC_GPIO (CC Romain, I sent a > warning but saw no action so far) in the next tree and compilation will break > for them. Alternatively, Grant may want to pull all the patches I did so far - they are in next for more than 10 days now and no complain has been raised. Also it's probably better to keep all GPIO-related changes into the same tree. Alex. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: acourbot@nvidia.com (Alex Courbot) Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2013 08:24:59 -0700 Subject: [PATCH 0/3] gpio: remove GENERIC_GPIO completely In-Reply-To: <1364562678-8945-1-git-send-email-acourbot@nvidia.com> References: <1364562678-8945-1-git-send-email-acourbot@nvidia.com> Message-ID: <5155B24B.2030601@nvidia.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 03/29/2013 06:11 AM, Alexandre Courbot wrote: > If I can get a few acks on these (or at least the first two ones) I'd like to > include them into my next branch as soon as possible so points of breakage can > be fixed. There are indeed a few new users of GENERIC_GPIO (CC Romain, I sent a > warning but saw no action so far) in the next tree and compilation will break > for them. Alternatively, Grant may want to pull all the patches I did so far - they are in next for more than 10 days now and no complain has been raised. Also it's probably better to keep all GPIO-related changes into the same tree. Alex.