From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ulf Hansson Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmc: mmci: Do not release spinlock in request_end Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 10:22:09 +0200 Message-ID: <4E97F131.6090406@stericsson.com> References: <1318342001-26955-1-git-send-email-ulf.hansson@stericsson.com> <20111013142914.GZ21648@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <1318521592.2090.16.camel@linaro1> <4E97E6CF.1000601@stericsson.com> <20111014074224.GQ21648@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <4E97EA10.6040800@stericsson.com> <20111014080318.GR21648@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from eu1sys200aog114.obsmtp.com ([207.126.144.137]:52154 "EHLO eu1sys200aog114.obsmtp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751386Ab1JNIW2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Oct 2011 04:22:28 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20111014080318.GR21648@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Sender: linux-mmc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org To: Russell King - ARM Linux Cc: "Jon Medhurst (Tixy)" , Lee Jones , "linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" >> If you do not update your tree how shall we be able to >> continue with integration of new patches that depends on mmc patches >> from "next"? > > That's what I'm saying - I can't take the patch as it introduces bugs > if I do. It's better to either wait until after the next merge window, > or we have to sort out merging it via the mmc tree instead. > Thanks, now I really get the problem! :-) From mmci host driver perspective this will then be kind of complicated since it sometimes will depend on the patches on the mmc "framework". Now we have the spinlock patch, but I believe this will happen soon again. So how can we handle to merge it via mmc tree instead? Will you be able to "Ack" patches for mmci so Chris Ball can merge them for the mmc tree instead? Of course I only mean patches that really has a dependency, the rest can be handled as is I believe. BR Uffe