From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: matthias.bgg@gmail.com (Matthias Brugger) Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 12:11:58 +0200 Subject: [GIT PULL] arm: mediatek: Add more basic features In-Reply-To: <20140924181625.GE19284@localhost> References: <20140924181625.GE19284@localhost> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi, 2014-09-24 20:16 GMT+02:00 Olof Johansson : > On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 05:59:28PM +0200, Matthias Brugger wrote: >> Hi Arnd and Olof, >> >> Please prepare for the next round of Mediatek patches for the mt6589. >> This patch set adds some minor changes to the Mediatek mt6589 support. >> >> Features are low-level debugging on the mt6589, the addition to the >> "make dtbs" and multi_v7_defconfig,as well as some small changes in >> the DTS files. > > Hi Matthias, > > The contents in this branch look OK to me, but I'd prefer to spread them out > across some of our branches (most of it is DT, one is defconfig and one is soc stuff). Do you want me to fix the other pull request I send [0]? As far as I can see, there are three patches for next/soc and the remaining four for next/dt. You want me to resend the pull request and split it in two? [0] http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg364271.html > > Because of this, I've ended up applying patches manually (cherry-picking them out of this branch). > > In other words: Code is merged, but branch is not. Thanks! > > (Also, we tend to use a capital ARM: as prefix on patch subjects, I fixed that up). Ok, thanks for the info. If you want me to resend the aforementioned pull request, I fix that too. Thanks, Matthias > > > -Olof -- motzblog.wordpress.com