From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com (Thomas Petazzoni) Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 12:47:38 +0200 Subject: arm: mvebu: improve Kconfig options handling for pinctrl In-Reply-To: <504F75BC.1070805@gmail.com> References: <1347266386-16229-1-git-send-email-sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com> <1347377834-19402-1-git-send-email-thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com> <504F75BC.1070805@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20120912124738.72a6c3cc@skate> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hello, Le Tue, 11 Sep 2012 19:32:44 +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth a ?crit : > as the linux-arm-kernel is already on this discussion, I'll not remove > it on this one. But with future RFC patches we should be more careful > who the patch is sent to. Since I wasn't sure you would take those patches, I thought sending to LAKML and other parties was a good idea. > I'd like to have pinctrl-mvebu patch set separated from this Kconfig > patch set. Not because it doesn't fit but because I don't want to > respin the pinctrl patch. Posting v3 without in-depth review of my > own was a mistake. A final v4 will get offending patches right. Well, in the end, you have to resend a new v4, so why not include those patches? Without those patches, the pinctrl stuff is not usable on 370/XP, which is not so nice. > For this patch set I will comment on the single patch emails. Thanks! Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux development, consulting, training and support. http://free-electrons.com