From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: davej@redhat.com (Dave Jones)
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2011 12:45:10 -0400
Subject: [PATCH 1/5] CPUFREQ/S3C64xx: Move S3C64xx CPUfreq driver into
	drivers/cpufreq
In-Reply-To: <20110601095811.GB13591@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
References: <20110601094313.GA23122@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
	<1306921493-30911-1-git-send-email-broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
	<BANLkTinR_WLjsgm5ogt_BbJwPFC0Kc1Dqg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20110601095811.GB13591@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Message-ID: <20110601164510.GA21467@redhat.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 10:58:11AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
 > On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 06:55:05PM +0900, Kyungmin Park wrote:
 > 
 > > Instead of samsung tree, it should be handled at cpufreq tree.
 > > CCed the cpufreq maintainer.
 > 
 > Well, it's a something for both really as both trees are updated.  I
 > sent the orginal copy of this patch to both places but both sets of
 > maintainers just ignored it (I've never seen any response from the
 > cpufreq maintainers on this driver ever since I originally submitted
 > it).  

Sorry about that. It's actually in my 'to merge' mailbox, but I've been
laggy at dealing with it recently.  I'll try and clear the backlog in
the next day or two.

thanks,

	Dave