From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: vladoman@gmail.com (Vladimir Pantelic)
Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2013 10:40:37 +0200
Subject: [Arm-netbook] getting allwinner SoC support upstream (was Re:
 Uploading linux (3.9.4-1))
In-Reply-To: <CAPweEDx_1fvAv9sROtPreoyyj_yDAuYb040fM2zPc+tf22d=YA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPweEDx3mAy40BZrzrKPRbvg7vKMj7KevDQ3m_v4p6Yo50eSGg@mail.gmail.com>
 <1851164.HnXhGSdttW@flatron>
 <CAPweEDxWW4LUeBaHLb+wHuAMq=63p88zsx4tumVb2PdP_+ohAw@mail.gmail.com>
 <1622862.fXQWv0YWGV@flatron>
 <CAPweEDx_1fvAv9sROtPreoyyj_yDAuYb040fM2zPc+tf22d=YA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <51B19C85.9090407@gmail.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

luke.leighton wrote:>   so.
 >
 >   coming back to what you said earlier: i'm formulating what to say to
 > allwinner [and need to pre-send something by monday so that they can
 > consider it before the meeting].  so far, it consists of:
 >
 > * device-tree is what the linux kernel community has come up with, it
 > is equivalent to FEX.
 >
 > * the linux kernel community would like to apologise for not
 > consulting with you (allwinner) on the decision to only accept device
 > tree

apologize? WTF?

 > * allwinner and the linux and sunxi community therefore need to work
 > closer together, we propose:
 >
 > * {insert proposals here}

1) switch to DT
2) there is no 2)

 > 3 days left on the clock.

tick tock