From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Wed, 04 Feb 2015 12:09:49 +0100 (CET) Received: from arrakis.dune.hu ([78.24.191.176]:60650 "EHLO arrakis.dune.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by eddie.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S27011464AbbBDLJsdb51p (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Feb 2015 12:09:48 +0100 Received: from arrakis.dune.hu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by arrakis.dune.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80B43283FEF; Wed, 4 Feb 2015 12:07:11 +0100 (CET) Received: from dicker-alter.lan (p548C81C6.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.140.129.198]) by arrakis.dune.hu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA; Wed, 4 Feb 2015 12:07:11 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <54D1FE0F.3030308@openwrt.org> Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2015 12:10:07 +0100 From: John Crispin User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Paul Bolle CC: Wim Van Sebroeck , Ralf Baechle , Valentin Rothberg , Guenter Roeck , linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: watchdog: SOC_MT7621? References: <1423044809.23894.65.camel@x220> <54D1F248.4090406@openwrt.org> <1423047893.23022.13.camel@x220> In-Reply-To: <1423047893.23022.13.camel@x220> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 45648 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: blogic@openwrt.org Precedence: bulk List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0 List-Id: linux-mips X-List-ID: linux-mips List-subscribe: List-owner: List-post: List-archive: X-list: linux-mips On 04/02/2015 12:04, Paul Bolle wrote: > On Wed, 2015-02-04 at 11:19 +0100, John Crispin wrote: >> On 04/02/2015 11:13, Paul Bolle wrote: >>> Is SOC_MT7621 still being worked on? >> >> yes we dropped the series as it collided with the gic rework that >> chromiun.org was working on. i hope to push it during the next merge >> window. the 1004k support has just been flaky till now as there was >> never any real silicon to test it on. the chromium people really did a >> good job at making the gic code nicer. > > Thanks for explaining this. Unless SOC_MT7621 takes a long time to land > in linux-next I won't be bothering you again about this. (I think I'll > use "by the end of the v3.20 series" as a definition of a long time.) > >> quite an impressive Cc list you have there > > Yes, that's the way it works with problems that span two (or more) > subsystems (in this case watchdog and MIPS). Actually, much longer CC > lists are used regularly on lkml. > > Thanks! > > > Paul Bolle > i think wim should just drop it and we leave it in openwrt with the other 1/2 million patches that we have. i prefer to upstream the stuff without feeling pressured to hurry up, that kills the fun. @Wim, can you drop the patch please ? John