From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Vladimir Pantelic Subject: Re: getting allwinner SoC support upstream (was Re: Uploading linux (3.9.4-1)) Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2013 10:40:37 +0200 Message-ID: <51B19C85.9090407@gmail.com> References: <1851164.HnXhGSdttW@flatron> <1622862.fXQWv0YWGV@flatron> Reply-To: Linux on small ARM machines Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: arm-netbook-bounces@lists.phcomp.co.uk Sender: "arm-netbook" To: Linux on small ARM machines Cc: devicetree-discuss , Linux Kernel Mailing List , debian-arm@lists.debian.org, "jonsmirl@gmail.com" , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, debian-kernel@lists.debian.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.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