Stable I2C branch needed as a dependency for Tegra change

Stable I2C branch needed as a dependency for Tegra change

[Stephen Warren]

Wolfram,

A change I'd like to make for Tegra in 3,5:

http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg172756.html

relies on an I2C change that's also scheduled for 3.5:

http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-i2c/msg07808.html
(which is already committed as 1475e39 "of/i2c: implement
of_find_i2c_adapter_by_node")

Is your i2c-embedded/for-next branch stable (i.e. that commit will not
be rebased between now and when you send a pull request for 3.5), so I
can use it as a baseline for a Tegra branch? If not, could you let me
know when it is stable, so I can create the Tegra branch as that time.

Thanks!

Stable I2C branch needed as a dependency for Tegra change

[Wolfram Sang]

Hi,

> Is your i2c-embedded/for-next branch stable (i.e. that commit will not
> be rebased between now and when you send a pull request for 3.5), so I
> can use it as a baseline for a Tegra branch? If not, could you let me
> know when it is stable, so I can create the Tegra branch as that time.

Because of my holidays coming along, I'd think my for-next branch is
done now (except for additions maybe). Yet, when and how to rewind the
branch and/or offering a stable base in general is another thing I need
to scratch my head about afterwards.

Regards,

   Wolfram

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Wolfram Sang                |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20120512/fbddbaad/attachment.sig>

Stable I2C branch needed as a dependency for Tegra change

[Stephen Warren]

On 05/12/2012 12:45 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> Hi,
> 
>> Is your i2c-embedded/for-next branch stable (i.e. that commit
>> will not be rebased between now and when you send a pull request
>> for 3.5), so I can use it as a baseline for a Tegra branch? If
>> not, could you let me know when it is stable, so I can create the
>> Tegra branch as that time.
> 
> Because of my holidays coming along, I'd think my for-next branch
> is done now (except for additions maybe). Yet, when and how to
> rewind the branch and/or offering a stable base in general is
> another thing I need to scratch my head about afterwards.

No worries then; I'll hold the dependent patch until 3.6; that way
there won't be any specific dependencies.