From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: horms@verge.net.au (Simon Horman) Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2014 10:41:32 +0900 Subject: [GIT PULL 00/12] Second Round of Renesas ARM Based SoC Updates for v3.15 In-Reply-To: <20140221222544.GA13233@quad.lixom.net> References: <20140220094324.GR19089@quad.lixom.net> <20140221222544.GA13233@quad.lixom.net> Message-ID: <20140222014132.GA5393@verge.net.au> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 02:25:44PM -0800, Olof Johansson wrote: > On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 01:43:24AM -0800, Olof Johansson wrote: > > On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 05:04:56PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote: > > > Hi Olof, Hi Kevin, Hi Arnd, > > > > > > please consider this second round of Renesas ARM Based SoC updates for v3.15. > > > > > > This pull-request is based on the first round of such changes, > > > tagged as renesas-soc-for-v3.15, which I have previously sent a > > > pull-request for. > > > > > > > > > The following changes since commit 012a7069b5a10a0851584d71a1facdc40a972319: > > > > > > ARM: shmobile: r8a7790: Add PCI USB host clock support (2014-02-04 10:25:03 +0900) > > > > > > are available in the git repository at: > > > > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/horms/renesas.git tags/renesas-soc2-for-v3.15 > > > > Hi, > > > > I'm stopping my merges for the night here, so I haven't merged this but I'll > > likely do it tomorrow. I did have comments on one of the patches though (that > > adds a new include/mach file that's not really needed). Fixing that can be done > > incrementally though, especially if you have downstream users of this branch. > > Simon, > > I think it'd fit our workflow better if you kept all the clock changes in > a topic branch this release, instead of mingling them with the SoC code. > There is enough of them that it's not just a silly short branch, and there's > little overlap with the rest of the soc code changes you have (i.e. it makes > more sense for us to merge in with a drivers branch instead of keeping it all > with soc). > > Would you mind respinning and sorting that out to a separate topic? Since > I've already merged the first soc branch (but treated it like a clock > branch), feel free to keep that as a base for the new clock branch > (but not for the new soc branch, ideally). Sure, I will see about doing that. In the mean time, please disregard "Third Round of Renesas ARM Based SoC Updates", which I sent before I saw this email. I think that all the other pull-request that I sent yesterday should be unaffected by this change.