From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alexander Holler Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/9] dt: dependencies (for deterministic driver initialization order based on the DT) Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2014 11:26:59 +0200 Message-ID: <53FDA463.8040704@ahsoftware.de> References: <20140825093931.GB2399@ulmo> <20140825133714.GH4163@ulmo.nvidia.com> <20140826084208.AE5F0C40989@trevor.secretlab.ca> <20140826084922.GG17263@ulmo> <53FC566C.30904@ahsoftware.de> <20140826102503.GC31124@ulmo> <53FC6513.5040800@ahsoftware.de> <20140826110827.GA31350@ulmo> <53FC6E4A.6030407@ahsoftware.de> <20140826114718.GB641@ulmo> <53FC76E8.5050009@ahsoftware.de> <53FD85C7.4080900@ahsoftware.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <53FD85C7.4080900@ahsoftware.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Jon Loeliger Cc: Thierry Reding , Grant Likely , Mark Rutland , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , Russell King , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Rob Herring , Arnd Bergmann , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org Am 27.08.2014 09:16, schrieb Alexander Holler: > Why should I? I've posted patches along with a lot of comments and > explanations, and e.g. you are just talking that it should be made like > my patches already did. And others do talk too like my patches and the > accompanying comments from me which explain most stuff never have > existed and just repeat what the patches already do without refering to > them. Just to repeat myself: These patches which started this thread are not just some ideas without any sense for the amount of work necessary to implement them (as seen so often). These patches are real working code everyone can apply to the mentioned kernel version and see what happens with his board. They are even checkpatched to avoid bean counting discussion. (Don't forget to use patch 10/9 too) Regards, Alexander Holler