From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: tony@atomide.com (Tony Lindgren) Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2010 12:40:40 +0300 Subject: [GIT PULL] debug macro changes for 2.6.36 In-Reply-To: <20100731092838.GE23886@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <1280465905.11181.41.camel@pororo.lan> <20100730071805.GB29746@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <1280474636.27902.1.camel@pororo.lan> <20100730081419.GA3208@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20100731092838.GE23886@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Message-ID: <20100803094040.GX12293@atomide.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org * Russell King - ARM Linux [100731 12:27]: > On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 09:46:16PM -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > > On Fri, 30 Jul 2010, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > > My intention was to have your patch merged - as patches - into an > > > appropriate place in my tree, and then just before the merge window > > > run that script to remove all the references to phys_io/io_pg_offst, > > > and finally, some time later, the members from the structure. > > > > Just to be clear, would you prefer for Jeremy to send you those initial > > patches through your patch system or via a Git pull request? > > I think patches would be better, so there's no dependencies on stuff I > have in my tree already - and I'll be free to add them at the most > appropriate point. > > However, it seems one of the patches still contains questions over OMAP > which haven't been addressed (or maybe they have and the commit comment > hasn't been updated.) That needs resolving before they can be merged. > I've forwarded the email to linux-omap and Tony, but I'm not expecting > a reply before Monday or so as OMAP folk seem to keep to sane working > hours. Sorry for being a bottleneck here, just got back from a vacation yesterday. Looking at these patches today. Regards, Tony