From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: dwalker@codeaurora.org (Daniel Walker) Date: Mon, 28 Dec 2009 17:25:13 -0800 Subject: tree with htc dream support In-Reply-To: <20091228204848.GB1637@ucw.cz> References: <20091213212504.GD5114@elf.ucw.cz> <20091227093537.GD11737@elf.ucw.cz> <20091227201514.GA29174@elf.ucw.cz> <20091227203704.GK11737@elf.ucw.cz> <20091227211322.GB29174@elf.ucw.cz> <20091227101824.GB1478@ucw.cz> <20091228204848.GB1637@ucw.cz> Message-ID: <1262049913.17445.27.camel@desktop> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Mon, 2009-12-28 at 21:48 +0100, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > > > >> > Switch smd code to the version in staging. Something to apply to > > >> > dream/ tree I'd say... and yes, it still works. > > >> > > >> I think we might want to consider leaving at least the core smd code > > >> under mach-msm. > > > > > > In the long run, I agree. > > > > > > In the short run... the code is staging quality, so it should be in > > > staging... and you'll not have to mainain so huge diff. (-20 kLoc). > > > > The core smd stuff is really not that large. The central smd.[ch] are > > about 1300 lines, and proc_comm.[ch] are about 400 lines. Is it > > possible to get some review/feedback as to what's "staging quality" > > about this code so we can clean it up? I'd rather just fix the > > issues > > Just submit it to Daniel W., ccing rmk and l-a-k, and I'm sure you'll > get feedback. I have it in my tree already .. My tree has some duplication over staging, for instance the rpc code is mostly in my tree, as is the smd code. Daniel