From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: tony@atomide.com (Tony Lindgren) Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2016 08:24:53 -0800 Subject: [PATCH] ARM: dts: n900: Include adp1653 device In-Reply-To: <20160127111828.GK5783@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <1451086812-3729-1-git-send-email-pali.rohar@gmail.com> <20160121091241.GS7192@pali> <20160121092909.GH5783@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20160121101828.GA7411@amd> <20160121163857.GH19432@atomide.com> <20160121165408.GJ5783@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20160127100237.GH25796@pali> <20160127111828.GK5783@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Message-ID: <20160127162452.GJ19432@atomide.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org * Russell King - ARM Linux [160127 03:19]: > On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 11:02:37AM +0100, Pali Roh?r wrote: > > In my opinion this patch is not support for new hardware. It just add > > missing DT definition for one specific board for HW which was added to > > linux kernel in v4.2-rc1 version. For me it looks like that needed DT > > definition was forgotten... > > Opinions differ, but ultimately it's up to whoever is responsible for > accepting the patch, and in the case of ARM SoC based patches, the > arm-soc maintainers. Yeah. Sorry for long delay as discussed. I'm applying the $subject patch finally into omap-for-v4.6/dt today. We still have at least two fixes left to go that both affect also n900. But at least I can now sanely test adding new stuff with a WIP fix for the PM runtime regression. > The arm-soc maintainers close their trees for development changes a > few weeks before hand (a patch of mine which was acked etc by 7th > December never made the 4.5 merge window either, and the alleged > reason I've been told is because arm-soc was already closed by then). Heh I too have some pending clock framework patches from December that I did not repost yet as the maintainers notified that they rather not take new stuff any longer for v4.5 before the holidays. Regards, Tony