From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: nicolas.ferre@atmel.com (Nicolas Ferre) Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 16:19:49 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 18/19] ARM: at91: suspend both memory controllers on at91sam9263 In-Reply-To: <201304181615.20542.arnd@arndb.de> References: <1359123276-15833-1-git-send-email-arnd@arndb.de> <1359153858-31992-19-git-send-email-arnd@arndb.de> <516FF8FC.7070901@atmel.com> <201304181615.20542.arnd@arndb.de> Message-ID: <51700105.9080802@atmel.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 04/18/2013 04:15 PM, Arnd Bergmann : > On Thursday 18 April 2013, Nicolas Ferre wrote: > >>> This patch blindly removes the warning and changes the >>> at91sam9263 to use the same code at at91sam9g45, which >>> may or may not be the right solution. If it is not, >>> maybe someone could provide a better fix. >> >> Maybe you can remove this paragraph: now you are using the proper fix >> with proper RAM type. >> >>> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann >>> Cc: Nicolas Ferre >> >> Acked-by: Nicolas Ferre >> >> What is the future of this patch series: do you want us to take this >> patch separately or to you want to apply the whole series on the arm-soc >> tree? > > I'd prefer if you could just apply or forward it to an appropriate tree. > > Most of the other patches have found their way into mainline by now. > >>> Cc: Jean-Christophe Plagniol-Villard >>> Cc: Andrew Victor >>> Cc: Albin Tonnerre >>> Cc: Daniel Lezcano >> >> Moreover, this patch my conflict with Daniel's current initiative to >> move cpuidle driver to its own directory: how do we coordinate with each >> other? > > Maybe you can make sure it actually works and send it to Daniel to apply on > top of his other patches? Well, as Daniel's patches are still under construction, I stack this one on the at91-3.10-soc branch and let Daniel rebase his work on top of a 3.10-rc1-ish tree... Best regards, -- Nicolas Ferre