From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Simon Horman Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 23:25:03 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/20 v2][RFC] arm64: Salvator-X sound support Message-Id: <20150917232500.GA18579@verge.net.au> List-Id: References: <87vbb97kci.wl%kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com> In-Reply-To: <87vbb97kci.wl%kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-sh@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 09:47:41AM +0000, Kuninori Morimoto wrote: > > Hi Simon > > > > 5) - 14): for Salvator-X > > > 15) - 17): for Salvator-X > > > 18): based on 2) > > > > > > 19) 20): posted by Wolfram > > > > Do you have any thoughts the above patches going into topic branches? > > It seems a bit messy but possible from my light analysis so far. > > what does it mean ? > What/Which is messy ? Sorry for my poor choice of words. I was not referring to the code itself, rather that the patchset doesn't appear to map well to a single topic branch. What I see is something like this: 1) dmaengine core topic 2,3) ak4613 driver topic 5-18) i2c+sound integration topics 19,20) i2c driver topic I think the above can be constructed if you think it is worthwhile. There are of course other possibilities.