From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel Lezcano Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 5/7] arm: add basic support for Mediatek MT6589 boards Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 20:56:07 +0200 Message-ID: <53C96DC7.10203@linaro.org> References: <1404745988-32558-1-git-send-email-matthias.bgg@gmail.com> <1404745988-32558-6-git-send-email-matthias.bgg@gmail.com> <53C8ED0B.5080802@linaro.org> <127793649.dTvqVjg5LM@diego> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <127793649.dTvqVjg5LM@diego> Sender: linux-doc-owner@vger.kernel.org To: =?UTF-8?B?SGVpa28gU3TDvGJuZXI=?= Cc: Matthias Brugger , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, robh+dt@kernel.org, pawel.moll@arm.com, mark.rutland@arm.com, ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk, galak@codeaurora.org, rdunlap@infradead.org, linux@arm.linux.org.uk, tglx@linutronix.de, grant.likely@linaro.org, thierry.reding@gmail.com, florian.vaussard@epfl.ch, jic23@kernel.org, jason@lakedaemon.net, andrew@lunn.ch, silvio.fricke@gmail.com, olof@lixom.net, sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com, sboyd@codeaurora.org, gregory.clement@free-electrons.com, arnd@arndb.de, robherring2@gmail.com, marc.zyngier@arm.com, maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com, soren.brinkmann@xilinx.com, shawn.guo@freescale.com, anders.berg@lsi.com, linus.walleij@linaro.org, ak@linux.intel.com, hpa@linux.intel.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, fabf@skynet.be, rostedt@goodmis.orgd List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 07/18/2014 12:47 PM, Heiko St=C3=BCbner wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > Am Freitag, 18. Juli 2014, 11:46:51 schrieb Daniel Lezcano: >> On 07/07/2014 05:13 PM, Matthias Brugger wrote: >>> This adds a generic devicetree board file and a dtsi for boards >>> based on MT6589 SoCs from Mediatek. >>> >>> Apart from the generic parts (gic, clocks) the only component >>> currently supported are the timers. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Matthias Brugger >>> -- >> >> I will take this patchset through my tree but this patch touches an = area >> I am not handling. >> >> Olof, Arnd, do you mind to ack this patch ? > > wouldn't it be easier to just take patches 1,2,3,4 through your tree = and let > patches 5,6,7 go through arm-soc? > > There is no compile-time dependency between the two parts, so they wi= ll come > together nicely in linux-next and during the merge-window. > > > Also in [0] Olof wrote: > > ---------- > Traditionally we usually take the DT changes through arm-soc, but as > long as we share the branch we might be ok. We tend to stick them in > different branches in our tree though, so rockchip will be a little > mis-sorted this release. Not a big deal, and we can deal with it. > ----------- > > So I'd assume splitting the patchset this way might be a nice solutio= n? > > > Heiko > > > [0] http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg347053.html Indeed. Olof, Arnd ? Will you take the patches 5-6-7 ? --=20 Linaro.org =E2=94=82 Open source software fo= r ARM SoCs =46ollow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog