From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paul Mundt Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2012 02:32:12 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/17] sh and mach-shmobile struct sh_clk_ops rename Message-Id: <20120307023211.GA10151@linux-sh.org> List-Id: References: <20120229131605.29154.8330.sendpatchset@w520> In-Reply-To: <20120229131605.29154.8330.sendpatchset@w520> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-sh@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 11:24:20PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Tuesday, March 06, 2012, Paul Mundt wrote: > > There are a few ways to do this I suppose. A common topic branch that we > > can pull in to either the SH or ARM side makes sense. We can do the > > entire series in one topic branch that gets merged twice and we just make > > sure that no rebasing takes place, or we can do patches 1-2 on a common > > branch, then 3-8 on an rmobile branch based on the common on, 9-16 on an > > sh one, and then leave 17 for the end of the merge window. > > > > Ultimately it depends on how much more work there is going to be done > > built on top of this. The sh changes are minimal, so I'm not too worried > > about merge conflicts even if we just keep all of these batched together. > > OK, so would you mind if I created a clk_ops-rename branch in the renesas > tree at git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rafael/renesas.git > and put the whole $subject series into it? > Sounds fine to me.