From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: horms@verge.net.au (Simon Horman)
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2013 09:57:09 +0900
Subject: [GIT PULL] Renesas ARM SoC updates for v3.10 #2
In-Reply-To: <20130402202503.GC8015@quad.lixom.net>
References: <1364879246-9470-1-git-send-email-horms+renesas@verge.net.au>
 <20130402202503.GC8015@quad.lixom.net>
Message-ID: <20130403005707.GA30263@verge.net.au>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Tue, Apr 02, 2013 at 01:25:03PM -0700, Olof Johansson wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 02, 2013 at 02:06:56PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> > Hi Arnd, Hi Olof,
> > 
> > The following changes since commit 4c82e452732784419fd616cf1acf2bc9b004aae1:
> > 
> >   Merge tag 'renesas-intc-external-irq2-for-v3.10' into soc-base (2013-04-02 10:55:57 +0900)
> > 
> > are available in the git repository at:
> > 
> > 
> >   git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/horms/renesas.git tags/renesas-soc2-for-v3.10
> > 
> > for you to fetch changes up to 8585deb18580d04209a2986430aa0959ef38fce2:
> > 
> >   ARM: shmobile: r8a7790 SoC 64-bit DT support (2013-04-02 11:02:21 +0900)
> > 
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> > Second round of Renesas ARM SoC updates for v3.10
> > 
> > Some Highlights:
> > 
> > * Add r8a7790 SoC
> > * Add r8a73a4 SoC
> > * Migrate r8a7740 SoC from INTC to GIC
> > * Add thermal driver support to r8a73a4 SoC
> > * Add irqpin DT nodes to sh73a0 SoC
> > * Add SCIF support to r8a7778 SoC
> > 
> > This pull request is based on a merge of:
> > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/horms/renesas renesas-soc-for-v3.10
> > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/horms/renesas renesas-intc-external-irq2-for-v3.10
> 
> Ugh. So, the irq branch depends on the old soc branch, and now this depends on
> the irq branch (and it is soc code). That's a circular dependency.
>
> I'll add this as a next/soc2 branch in arm-soc, but please think about these
> kind of circular dependencies in the future, and try to avoid them if you can
> by splitting the branch contents in separate topics if possible.

Sorry about that. I have been having a bit of trouble managing the
dependencies and some assumptions I made with earlier branches
turned out to be invalid as new patches came in. I'll try to be
more careful in future.

> Likewise, there's a bunch of patches in this branch such as the fixed
> divisor clock patches that could be considered cleanup. Not a big deal to
> group them with the soc code, but if you're already doing cleanup
> branches it'd be just as well to put them in those.

I'm not carrying any cleanup branches at this time.
I will keep in in mind for future patches of this nature.