From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Vineet Gupta Subject: Re: Removal of GENERIC_GPIO breaks -next Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 18:46:44 +0530 Message-ID: <516EA0BC.2040109@synopsys.com> References: <516E9083.6050808@synopsys.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from vaxjo.synopsys.com ([198.182.60.75]:60328 "EHLO vaxjo.synopsys.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965643Ab3DQNQ7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Apr 2013 09:16:59 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Alexandre Courbot Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Shaveta Leekha , Christian Ruppert , linux-next On 04/17/2013 06:34 PM, Alexandre Courbot wrote: > > Yes, I am not too worried about arc since it doesn't break anything. > But as you mention it would be better if the whole job could be done > by the same patch. The problem here is the merge order, for me to > address this I need to work after your patches. OK I understand. Since your code touches a lot more stuff, I don't know if the ordering should be governed by this small harmless patch alone :-) > So maybe in the end my > series should be merged at the end of the merge window, and after all > architecture code is merged, to make sure I can address all instances. You are touching a lot of arches anyways so you will have to be after them anyways. Is that right ? Anyhow lets park this patch for now - we can push it in the 3.10-rc cycle. -Vineet