From: akpm@linux-foundation.org (Andrew Morton)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v3] Samsung: sdhci-s3c: add support for new card detection methods
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2010 13:57:08 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100726135708.57048800.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <000501cb2977$7d6cf210$7846d630$%szyprowski@samsung.com>
On Thu, 22 Jul 2010 10:25:44 +0200
Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Thursday, July 22, 2010 1:12 AM
>
> > On Fri, 16 Jul 2010 08:24:26 +0200
> > Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > > arch/arm/mach-s3c64xx/setup-sdhci-gpio.c | 14 +++++++++---
> > > > > arch/arm/mach-s5pc100/setup-sdhci-gpio.c | 21 ++++++++++++++----
> > -
> > > > > arch/arm/mach-s5pv210/setup-sdhci-gpio.c | 22 +++++++++++++++---
> > --
> > > > > arch/arm/plat-samsung/dev-hsmmc.c | 5 ++++
> > > > > arch/arm/plat-samsung/dev-hsmmc1.c | 5 ++++
> > > > > arch/arm/plat-samsung/dev-hsmmc2.c | 5 ++++
> > > > > arch/arm/plat-samsung/dev-hsmmc3.c | 5 ++++
> > > > > arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/sdhci.h | 29
> > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > > 8 files changed, 90 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > This is quite confusing. You've already sent a patch called
> > > > "sdhci-s3c: add support for new card detection methods". It had the
> > > > same changelog as this patch and the same title, but the two patches
> > > > are utterly different!
> > >
> > > The real patch has been split into two for easier merging: 1. the driver
> > > part and 2. samsung platform related part. The part which patch belongs
> > > to is indicated in the last line of the change log.
> > >
> > > I'm really confused how to submit properly a patch that requires changes
> > > to both the driver (which is merged by the proper driver maintainer's
> > > sub-tree) and the platform (which should go through platform maintainer's
> > > tree).
> >
> > Make the relationship very very clear in the changelog. Send both
> > patches to both maintainers. Ask that one of them merge both patches
> > and that the other ack both patches.
>
> Ok. Thanks for the hint.
>
> > Anyway, I've forgotten what's happening here. I appear to be sitting on
> >
> > sdhci-s3c-add-support-for-the-non-standard-minimal-clock-value.patch
>
> This one is independent from the card-detection patches and can be applied
> directly onto linux-next kernel tree.
>
> > and
> > sdhci-s3c-add-support-for-new-card-detection-methods.patch
> >
> > the latter of which is below.
> >
> > Am I missing something? Is
> > sdhci-s3c-add-support-for-new-card-detection-methods.patch up to date?
> >
>
> Ok, I will repost these 2 patches under new names to avoid further
> confusion. Currently there exists two
> "sdhci-s3c-add-support-for-new-card-detection-methods.patch", both of them
> are required.
So the second(?) patch "[PATCH v4] Samsung: add new card detection
methods in s3c-sdhci driver (platform part)" has already been applied
to linux-next by Kukjin Kim, along with modifications which we have not
been shown.
But the first patch
(sdhci-s3c-add-support-for-the-non-standard-minimal-clock-value.patch)
has not been applied to linux-next by anoyne and the third patch
"[PATCH v4] sdhci-s3c: add support for new card detection methods
(driver part)" has not been applied either.
This is a complete mess. What happens if I apply and merge
sdhci-s3c-add-support-for-the-non-standard-minimal-clock-value.patch
and
sdhci-s3c-add-support-for-new-card-detection-methods-driver-part.patch?
I have no idea.
I think I'll just drop all of it. Please sort all of this out then let
me know what you want me to do.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-07-26 20:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-07-15 8:15 [PATCH v3] Samsung: sdhci-s3c: add support for new card detection methods Marek Szyprowski
2010-07-15 20:39 ` Andrew Morton
2010-07-16 6:24 ` Marek Szyprowski
2010-07-21 23:11 ` Andrew Morton
2010-07-22 8:25 ` Marek Szyprowski
2010-07-26 20:57 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2010-07-27 6:12 ` Marek Szyprowski
2010-07-27 11:27 ` Kukjin Kim
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=20100726135708.57048800.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox