From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: vinod.koul@intel.com (Vinod Koul)
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2016 08:51:05 +0530
Subject: [PATCH v7 0/9] Fix broken DMAFLUSHP on Rockchips platform
In-Reply-To: <2223201.4nEkyUQu1O@phil>
References: <1453460812-8498-1-git-send-email-wxt@rock-chips.com>
 <3817335.PXCk0JfYDT@phil> <20160208131419.GA19598@localhost>
 <2223201.4nEkyUQu1O@phil>
Message-ID: <20160209032105.GD19598@localhost>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 11:21:57PM +0100, Heiko Stuebner wrote:
> Hi Vinod,
> 
> Am Montag, 8. Februar 2016, 18:44:19 schrieb Vinod Koul:
> > On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 10:27:04AM +0100, Heiko Stuebner wrote:
> > > Am Montag, 8. Februar 2016, 08:41:34 schrieb Vinod Koul:
> > > > On Mon, Feb 01, 2016 at 02:56:54PM +0800, Caesar Wang wrote:
> > > > > Hello Vinod,
> > > > > 
> > > > > Is there any chance apply the DMA patches?:-)
> > > > 
> > > > I was waiting for any ACKs on ARM patches before I merge this series.
> > > 
> > > I think the more regular way is for the driver maintainer to take the
> > > driver-specific stuff and the devicetree parts going through the
> > > specific arm- tree. But if you really want to take the whole series,
> > > for patches 4,5,6
> > Yes but that causes cross tree dependencies, which looking at this won't
> > be a big problem, so I can safely merge dmaengine changes and rest can go
> > thru ARM tree.
> > 
> > Typically submitter should say which tree he/she prefers, which was not
> > provided..
> > 
> > So, are all okay to merge the entire series thru dmaengine tree or
> > independent. I don't mind either
> 
> In general I don't mind either solution, but would prefer me taking the 3 
> "ARM: dts: foo" patches, while the rest would go through your tree.
> 
> Main reason is to prevent any possible conflicts with other Rockchip 
> devicetree additions also going into 4.6 .

Sounds good, will queue them up

-- 
~Vinod