From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
From: daniel.lezcano@linaro.org (Daniel Lezcano)
Date: Mon, 03 Jun 2013 10:39:28 +0200
Subject: [PATCHv6 00/11] Remove ARM local timer API
In-Reply-To: <20130531221633.GG599@codeaurora.org>
References: <1368473175-4841-1-git-send-email-sboyd@codeaurora.org>
<20130531174526.GD599@codeaurora.org> <51A8E71D.1000407@linaro.org>
<20130531221633.GG599@codeaurora.org>
Message-ID: <51AC5640.5060202@linaro.org>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org
On 06/01/2013 12:16 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> On 05/31, John Stultz wrote:
>> On 05/31/2013 10:45 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>>> Comments have been light for this round so I think we're about
>>> ready to merge. John/Thomas, can you pick up these patches or
>>> shall I route them through arm-soc or something else?
>>
>>
>> So there looks to be a fair amount of additions in the ARM tree, do
>> those already have acks from Arnd/Olof/other folks? (I think I was
>> only cc'ed on the first two patches).
>
> I'm still missing acks from Kukjin and Barry.
>
>>
>> Daniel (cc'ed) has just started helping out here, and should be able
>> to review and hopefully ack or pick up the timer related
>> drivers/clocksource changes to feed to Thomas' tree. Not sure if
>> he's got them in his mailbox so you might want to resend them and
>> make sure he's CC'ed.
>>
>> If Arnd/Olof/whomever else from the arm side has acked things,
>> Daniel probably could queue the arm changes too, but it might be
>> better just to get Daniel's ack on the drivers/clocksource changes
>> and then queue things via arm-soc?
>
> Either way works for me. I would just like to see this merged
> into 3.11. I guess I will resend one more time.
Yes please, resend. I will review them.
queuing the patches via arm-soc makes sense for me, but I prefer to
review them before we decide to which tree we get them merged.
Thanks
-- Daniel
--
Linaro.org ? Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook |
Twitter |
Blog