From: linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [patch v4 3/3] arm: omap4: support pmu
Date: Sat, 14 May 2011 10:49:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110514094920.GA6803@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimkrf8-+-JTQy-gWK9t9grj-n0Ftw@mail.gmail.com>
On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 04:48:52PM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> Hi Rabin,
>
> 2011/5/14 Rabin Vincent <rabin@rab.in>:
> > What happened to this patch? ?It is neither in mainline nor in
> > linux-next.
> >
>
> This patch depends on the two with titles:
>
> introduce cross trigger interface helpers
> pmu: allow platform specific irq enable/disable handling
>
> and the above patches have been submitted to RMK's patch system
> as 6839/1 and 6840/1, but not been pushed to -next or mainline by rmk,
> so I can't ask omap guys to merge this one into their tree now.
Given the state of linux-next, which isn't showing much in the way of
consolidation by anyone other than what's in my tree, I'm _desperately_
avoiding adding any new code for this coming merge window. In fact, the
picture in linux-next is looking worse than the state of my tree.
For arch/arm, my tree looks like this:
256 files changed, 1022 insertions(+), 14022 deletions(-)
And for-next:
748 files changed, 15066 insertions(+), 26209 deletions(-)
So there's a net reduction of 13000 lines in my tree, compared to a net
reduction of 11143 lines in linux-next - so a net increase of 1857 lines
for arch/arm from trees which aren't my tree.
This is rather disappointing, and if linux-next really does reflect the
current state across all ARM trees, it means that we have to keep the
consolidation agenda running into the next merge cycle.
So, I really can not afford to be adding new stuff into my tree at the
present time.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-14 9:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-03-08 15:38 [patch v4 0/3] arm: pmu: support pmu/perf on OMAP4 tom.leiming at gmail.com
2011-03-08 15:38 ` [patch v4 1/3] arm: introduce cross trigger interface helpers tom.leiming at gmail.com
2011-03-08 16:31 ` Ben Dooks
2011-03-24 14:41 ` Ming Lei
2011-03-09 5:38 ` Santosh Shilimkar
2011-03-08 15:38 ` [patch v4 2/3] arm: pmu: allow platform specific irq enable/disable handling tom.leiming at gmail.com
2011-03-08 15:38 ` [patch v4 3/3] arm: omap4: support pmu tom.leiming at gmail.com
2011-05-14 8:18 ` Rabin Vincent
2011-05-14 8:48 ` Ming Lei
2011-05-14 9:49 ` Russell King - ARM Linux [this message]
2011-05-15 14:16 ` Will Deacon
2011-05-16 1:28 ` Ming Lei
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=20110514094920.GA6803@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk \
--to=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).