From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Russell King - ARM Linux Subject: Re: [PATCH 21/31] ARM: amba: realview: get rid of private platform amba_device initializer Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 10:22:02 +0000 Message-ID: <20120125102202.GU16726@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <20120120092207.GD1068@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20120124160044.GM19798@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com> <20120124162328.GA8517@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20120124172600.GO19798@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com> <20120124214531.GB8517@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20120125095800.GC21709@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120125095800.GC21709@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com> Sender: linux-mmc-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Will Deacon Cc: "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org" , "linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org" , STEricsson List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 09:58:00AM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > Sure. Which branch shall I take it against (before or after your amba > changes)? If it's before them, we can think about putting it in as a fix during this -rc independently of the rest of the changes. If it's after, then it'll probably add a conflict. So, it'll be much easier to have it before, and I'll update what's necessary in the amba branch.