From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com (Boris BREZILLON) Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2014 16:41:50 +0200 Subject: [GIT PULL] at91: move of AIC drivers for 3.17: fixes #1 In-Reply-To: <20140815142225.GF5063@titan.lakedaemon.net> References: <1408031156-13573-1-git-send-email-nicolas.ferre@atmel.com> <20140815142225.GF5063@titan.lakedaemon.net> Message-ID: <20140815164150.5085b324@bbrezillon> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi Jason, On Fri, 15 Aug 2014 10:22:25 -0400 Jason Cooper wrote: > Nicolas, > > On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 05:45:56PM +0200, Nicolas Ferre wrote: > > Arnd, Olof, Kevin, > > > > Boris moved both of our AIC drivers to their new home: the drivers/irqchip > > directory taking advantage of the genirc framework. For DT-enabled SoCs, we can > > use these drivers (aic and aic5) right now: Jason merged them and they are > > available in early 3.17 merge window. > > So, I build this pull-request for enabling the use of these drivers now as: > > - we are very early in 3.17 development > > - it allowed us to avoid having to depend on Jason's branch before the opening > > of the merge window > > Then why did I create a topic branch for you to base on? > > git://git.infradead.org/users/jcooper/linux.git irqchip/atmel-aic Don't blame Nicolas for this, he was in vacation when you created this branch (he came back this week), and I should have told you that he couldn't use it for this release cycle. > > > - it removes some code from the mach-at91 directory: including the whole > > aic5 driver > > - we'd have quite a bit of time to solve issues if we found a bug > > - the code is basically moved so it should be error free. > > Well, this is certainly up to Arnd, Olof and Kevin, but it seems a bit > unusual. You're basically asking to merge changes into the current window > that has had _no_ time in -next... Sounds like a recipe for trouble to > me. > > In the future, please let me know if you're not going to need a topic > branch. This is all my fault, I'm the one who asked Nicolas to get these patches merged in 3.17, and, as I said, I should have told you that he was in vacation and thus could not use your topic branch for this release cycle. Anyway, I understand your concern about merging stuff that have not been tested on linux-next. Arnd, Olof, Kevin, I'd totally understand if you refuses to takes these patches for this release cycle. Best Regards, Boris -- Boris Brezillon, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com