From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: tomasz.figa@gmail.com (Tomasz Figa)
Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2014 10:57:23 +0200
Subject: [PATCH v3] ARM: dts: add CPU nodes for Exynos4 SoCs
In-Reply-To: <5423D5E8.1050008@samsung.com>
References: <5230569.XLlNbB5NvF@amdc1032>
 <018e01cfd885$770dd940$65298bc0$@kernel.org>
 <20140925081704.GA20841@e102568-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
 <5423D19B.1040203@samsung.com> <5423D23C.5010204@gmail.com>
 <5423D5E8.1050008@samsung.com>
Message-ID: <5423D8F3.104@gmail.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org



On 25.09.2014 10:44, Kukjin Kim wrote:
> On 09/25/14 17:28, Tomasz Figa wrote:
>> Hi Kukjin,
>>
>> On 25.09.2014 10:26, Kukjin Kim wrote:
>>> On 09/25/14 17:17, Lorenzo Pieralisi wrote:
>>>> [CC'ed Daniel to make him aware this patch goes through your tree]
>>>>
>>> Thanks and just note the branch  which is including this change actually
>>> v4 is just rebased not v3 will be sent out to arm-soc last tonight or
>>> tomorrow.
> 
> v3 is correct :) sorry, I confused the version...
> 
>>
>> Could you keep this patch in a separate stable branch, so I could pull
>> it as a dependency for Thomas Abraham's cpufreq series?
>>
> It's possible, but would be better that DT changes are sent to upstream
> through samsung/arm-soc tree?...we suffered ugly conflicts between
> arm-soc and driver before and then we decided DT changes should be
> handled in arm-soc...Hmm...

The only other option I can see is splitting the series and sending
mach/dts patches through arm-soc and clock/cpufreq patches through clock
tree. This would break cpufreq support in both trees, until they both
hit Linus's tree. If this is not a problem, then I can proceed this way.

Please correct me if I'm missing something.

Best regards,
Tomasz