From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Greg KH Subject: Re: [PATCH] i2c: update for semaphore to mutex conversion of devices Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 18:27:09 -0800 Message-ID: <20100309022709.GA25756@kroah.com> References: <20100309102828.18351564.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> <20100308235953.GA7808@kroah.com> <20100309125037.5a218f22.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100309125037.5a218f22.sfr@canb.auug.org.au> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Stephen Rothwell Cc: Linus , Andrew Morton , LKML , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, Jean Delvare List-Id: linux-next.vger.kernel.org On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 12:50:37PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > Hi Greg, > > On Mon, 8 Mar 2010 15:59:53 -0800 Greg KH wrote: > > > > On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 10:28:28AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > > I have been carrying this patch in linux-next for some time and now > > > mainline needs it. > > > > Well, it's not required, but it is nice to have. I didn't merge the > > "convert the driver core semaphore to a mutex" patch as it was causing > > too many false-positive lockdep warnings. > > Ah, I missed that, sorry. > > Strangely, I was assuming that what was in linux-next would get merged :-) That is normally the case, but when patches are found to have problems, due to the testing that happens with linux-next, they can then be not sent to Linus, right? That's what happened here, we need more infrastructure to be able to accept them. I see it as a validation that our development model is working properly that this happened :) thanks, greg k-h