From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: arnd@arndb.de (Arnd Bergmann) Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2014 11:25:07 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 2/5] ARM: BCM5301X: Add DT for Netgear R6300 V2 In-Reply-To: <547ECC88.1080308@hauke-m.de> References: <1417368513-13808-1-git-send-email-zajec5@gmail.com> <547ECC88.1080308@hauke-m.de> Message-ID: <4912203.5KJFPHsnGJ@wuerfel> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wednesday 03 December 2014 09:40:40 Hauke Mehrtens wrote: > On 12/03/2014 06:59 AM, Rafa? Mi?ecki wrote: > > On 3 December 2014 at 00:15, Hauke Mehrtens wrote: > >> On 11/30/2014 06:28 PM, Rafa? Mi?ecki wrote: > >>> Signed-off-by: Rafa? Mi?ecki > >>> --- > >>> arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile | 4 +- > >>> arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm4708-netgear-r6300-v2.dts | 84 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >>> 2 files changed, 87 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > >>> create mode 100644 arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm4708-netgear-r6300-v2.dts > >>> > >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile b/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile > >>> index 35f3e12..22bb87f 100644 > >>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile > >>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/Makefile > >>> @@ -55,7 +55,9 @@ dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_ATLAS6) += atlas6-evb.dtb > >>> dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_AXXIA) += axm5516-amarillo.dtb > >>> dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_BCM2835) += bcm2835-rpi-b.dtb > >>> dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_BCM2835) += bcm2835-rpi-b-plus.dtb > >>> -dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_BCM_5301X) += bcm4708-netgear-r6250.dtb > >>> +dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_BCM_5301X) += \ > >>> + bcm4708-netgear-r6250.dtb \ > >>> + bcm4708-netgear-r6300-v2.dtb > >> > >> This part does not apply cleanly on top of v3.18-rc1. > > > > I think we want these changes to be merged merged into the arm-soc.git > > next/dt, right? So I based my changes on that tree. This way Arnd > > won't get neither: any conflicts or any unwanted stuff. > > Arnd wants the changes based on -rc1, at least the last time. The > merge gets ugly if the changes are based on different versions. If you send multiple pull requests for the same release and the same topic branch (e.g. next/dt), you can choose to base on top of -rc1 or a prior branch as you like. You can also have a cleanup branch based on -rc1 that you send first, and then send other patches based on top of that. This makes sense in particular when you have patches for multiple branches (e.g. next/soc and next/drivers) but also want to restructure your code to make it easier to apply those. Any patches for next/cleanup should be cosmetic only and rearrange stuff but not do functional changes. > >>> dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_BCM_63XX) += bcm963138dvt.dtb > >>> dtb-$(CONFIG_ARCH_BCM_CYGNUS) += bcm911360_entphn.dtb \ > >>> bcm911360k.dtb \ > >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm4708-netgear-r6300-v2.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm4708-netgear-r6300-v2.dts > >>> new file mode 100644 > >>> index 0000000..e18b636 > >>> --- /dev/null > >>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm4708-netgear-r6300-v2.dts > >>> @@ -0,0 +1,84 @@ > >>> +/* > >>> + * Broadcom BCM470X / BCM5301X ARM platform code. > >>> + * DTS for Netgear R6300 V2 > >>> + * > >>> + * Copyright ? 2014 Rafa? Mi?ecki > >> > >> Is this ? needed here? > > > > Do you mean the whole line or the "?" sign? I think we usually have > > "Copyright" lines in files. I can see using "?" is much less common on > > the other hand. I think the most common forms are > > 1) Copyright (C) > > 2) Copyright > > Should I use some of them? > > Btw. do you know if this documented anywhere? > > > It was just the "?" sign, it's usage is pretty uncommon and I think it > is not an ASCII symbol. I would like if you choose 1 or 2, what exactly > does not matter for me. If you work for a large company, ask your legal department, they may have a strong opinion on this matter one way or another. If you don't work for a large company, don't worry about it. Arnd