From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: linux@roeck-us.net (Guenter Roeck) Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2017 20:29:27 -0800 Subject: [PATCH v9 2/3] MAINTAINERS: add zx2967 watchdog controller driver to ARM ZTE architecture In-Reply-To: <20170205034504.GD3407@dragon> References: <1486172055-13162-1-git-send-email-baoyou.xie@linaro.org> <1486172055-13162-2-git-send-email-baoyou.xie@linaro.org> <4cba1be6-ee85-7371-ea02-1bf8e7eb628e@roeck-us.net> <20170205034504.GD3407@dragon> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 02/04/2017 07:45 PM, Shawn Guo wrote: > Hi Baoyou, > > On Sun, Feb 05, 2017 at 10:36:38AM +0800, Baoyou Xie wrote: >> On 5 February 2017 at 08:05, Guenter Roeck wrote: >> >>> On 02/03/2017 05:34 PM, Baoyou Xie wrote: >>> >>>> Add the zx2967 watchdog controller driver as maintained by ARM ZTE >>>> architecture maintainers, as they're parts of the core IP. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Baoyou Xie >>>> >>> >>> Reviewed-by: Guenter Roeck >>> >>> I assume you'll submit this patch through the arm tree ? >>> >> Could you please submit all three patches through your tree? Thanks a lot >> :) > > Patch #2 is the only one that Guenter is concerned about, as there are > other subsystem related updates on the file. I think Guenter's > suggestion is good, i.e. we have patch #1 and #3 go upstream through > watchdog tree, and later we update MAINTAINERS as needed via arm-soc > tree. > Yes. One of the problems is that the patch doesn't apply to my tree (which is based on v4.10-rc3), and it doesn't have a common anchestor, meaning it is most likely not based on mainline. I would prefer to avoid conflicts with the arm tree if possible. Guenter