* Re: [PATCH v4 00/29] SH pinctrl and pinmux implementation
2013-03-08 10:55 [PATCH v4 00/29] SH pinctrl and pinmux implementation Laurent Pinchart
@ 2013-03-08 15:25 ` Simon Horman
2013-03-08 15:43 ` Laurent Pinchart
` (6 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Simon Horman @ 2013-03-08 15:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sh
On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 11:55:41AM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Here's the fourth version of the SuperH and SH Mobile pin controllers (PFC)
> pinctrl and pinmux support patches. The patches are available from my git tree
> at
>
> git://linuxtv.org/pinchartl/fbdev.git pinmux/3.9/pinctrl
>
> The patches are based on top of the following two commits from Linus' pinctrl
> tree:
>
> 022ab148d28e8 "pinctrl: Declare operation structures as const"
> a72149e82b65b "pinctrl: core: use devres_release() instead of devres_destroy()"
I assume that I should make a branch based on a branch which includes
those commits.
Linus, is there a stable branch that includes those commits at this time?
> merged into the pinmux/3.9/base branch in my tree, as well as the "ARM:
> shmobile: marzen: Include mmc/host.h" patch hand-picked from the mailing list
> to fix a compilation breakage.
Thanks, I'll send that as a fix inclusion in 3.9.
> As previously, the series start with miscellaneous cleanup and rework patches
> that slowly get the code in shape. Patches 14/29 and 15/29 then rework the GPIO
> code to split real GPIOs and function GPIOS in two gpio_chip instances. Patches
> 16/29 to 22/29 are more miscellaneous cleanups to prepare for patch 23/29 that
> adds support for sparse GPIO numbering (this was the major issue with v2).
> Patch 29/29 implements real pinctrl and pinmux support.
>
> This pinctrl and pinmux implementation simply replaces the existing one. This
> should be safe as I've verified that the pinctrl and pinmux APIs are not used
> by any SuperH or SH Mobile board code or driver.
>
> I consider this set as ready to be queued for v3.10. As with the previous PFC
> patch sets there are dependencies between board code changes and sh-pfc
> changes, so it would be easier to merge everything through the ARM tree.
>
> Please note that patch "ARM: shmobile: sh73a0: Support sparse GPIO numbers"
> touches both board code and sh-pfc code. This would be hard to avoid.
>
> Changes since v3:
>
> - Drop pinctrl core fields constification patch
> - Replace pinctrl_add_gpio_range() with gpiochip_add_pin_range()
>
> Changes since v2:
>
> - Rebased on v3.9-rc1
> - Constify fields in the pinctrl core
> - Support sparse GPIO numbers
> - Drop LCD(C) pin groups and functions (moved to another patch set)
>
> Changes since v1:
>
> - Port the bonito board to the pinmux API
> - Set the pins gpio_chip dev field correctly
>
> Guennadi Liakhovetski (2):
> sh-pfc: Fix a typo and simplify a definition on sh73a0
> ARM: shmobile: sh73a0: Support sparse GPIO numbers
>
> Laurent Pinchart (27):
> sh-pfc: Declare operation structures as const
> sh-pfc: Don't define the per-device pinctrl struct instances as global
> sh-pfc: Drop the sh_pfc_pinctrl spinlock
> sh-pfc: Don't take the sh_pfc spinlock in sh_pfc_map_gpios()
> sh-pfc: Use GPIO_FN instead of PINMUX_GPIO where possible
> sh-pfc: Replace first_gpio and last_gpio with nr_gpios
> sh-pfc: Replace SoC info data and mark ranges with a number of pins
> sh-pfc: Remove unused sh_pfc_soc_info reserved_id field
> sh-pfc: Initialize pinmux_gpio flags statically
> sh-pfc: Make struct pinmux_gpio enum_id field const
> sh-pfc: Shrink the pinctrl GPIO range to include real GPIOs only
> sh-pfc: Don't needlessly check GPIO type in sh_gpio_free()
> sh-pfc: Split pins and functions definition tables
> sh-pfc: Split pins and functions into separate gpio_chip instances
> sh-pfc: Rename struct pinmux_pin to struct sh_pfc_pin
> sh-pfc: Look up IRQ table entries by GPIO number
> sh-pfc: Share the PORT_10_REV, PORT_32 and PORT_32_REV definitions
> sh-pfc: Use pinmux identifiers in the pin muxing API
> sh-pfc: Simplify the sh_pfc_gpio_is_pin() logic
> sh-pfc: Add function to retrieve a pin instance from its pin number
> sh-pfc: Replace pinctrl_add_gpio_range() with gpiochip_add_pin_range()
> sh-pfc: Add support for sparse pin numbers
> ARM: shmobile: ap4-evb: Replace GPIO_PORTx enum with GPIO port numbers
> ARM: shmobile: armadillo: Replace GPIO_PORTx enum with GPIO port
> numbers
> ARM: shmobile: bonito: Replace GPIO_PORTx enum with GPIO port numbers
> ARM: shmobile: mackerel: Replace GPIO_PORTx enum with GPIO port
> numbers
> sh-pfc: Expose real groups and functions in pinctrl/pinmux operations
>
> arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-ag5evm.c | 26 +-
> arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-ap4evb.c | 36 +-
> arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-armadillo800eva.c | 58 +--
> arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-bonito.c | 6 +-
> arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-kota2.c | 42 +-
> arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-kzm9g.c | 14 +-
> arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-mackerel.c | 34 +-
> arch/arm/mach-shmobile/include/mach/sh73a0.h | 2 +-
> drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/core.c | 71 +--
> drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/core.h | 15 +-
> drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/gpio.c | 239 +++++++---
> drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-r8a7740.c | 84 ++--
> drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-r8a7779.c | 51 +-
> drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-sh7203.c | 480 +++++++++----------
> drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-sh7264.c | 452 +++++++++---------
> drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-sh7269.c | 616 ++++++++++++------------
> drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-sh7372.c | 82 ++--
> drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-sh73a0.c | 97 ++--
> drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-sh7720.c | 325 ++++++-------
> drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-sh7722.c | 472 +++++++++---------
> drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-sh7723.c | 634 +++++++++++++------------
> drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-sh7724.c | 630 ++++++++++++------------
> drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-sh7734.c | 47 +-
> drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-sh7757.c | 612 ++++++++++++------------
> drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-sh7785.c | 346 +++++++-------
> drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-sh7786.c | 288 +++++------
> drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pfc-shx3.c | 140 +++---
> drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/pinctrl.c | 281 +++++------
> drivers/pinctrl/sh-pfc/sh_pfc.h | 94 +++-
> 29 files changed, 3198 insertions(+), 3076 deletions(-)
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Laurent Pinchart
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sh" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v4 00/29] SH pinctrl and pinmux implementation
2013-03-08 10:55 [PATCH v4 00/29] SH pinctrl and pinmux implementation Laurent Pinchart
2013-03-08 15:25 ` Simon Horman
@ 2013-03-08 15:43 ` Laurent Pinchart
2013-03-09 4:28 ` Simon Horman
` (5 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Laurent Pinchart @ 2013-03-08 15:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sh
Hi Simon,
On Friday 08 March 2013 16:25:53 Simon Horman wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 11:55:41AM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Here's the fourth version of the SuperH and SH Mobile pin controllers
> > (PFC) pinctrl and pinmux support patches. The patches are available from
> > my git tree at
> >
> > git://linuxtv.org/pinchartl/fbdev.git pinmux/3.9/pinctrl
> >
> > The patches are based on top of the following two commits from Linus'
> > pinctrl tree:
> >
> > 022ab148d28e8 "pinctrl: Declare operation structures as const"
> > a72149e82b65b "pinctrl: core: use devres_release() instead of
> > devres_destroy()"
>
> I assume that I should make a branch based on a branch which includes
> those commits.
>
> Linus, is there a stable branch that includes those commits at this time?
022ab148d28e8 is in Linus' for-next branch, so I think it should be stable.
> > merged into the pinmux/3.9/base branch in my tree, as well as the "ARM:
> > shmobile: marzen: Include mmc/host.h" patch hand-picked from the mailing
> > list to fix a compilation breakage.
>
> Thanks, I'll send that as a fix inclusion in 3.9.
Could you create a branch based on v3.9-rc1 + the mmc fix + anything you deem
appropriate and merge 022ab148d28e8 from
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/linusw/linux-pinctrl.git into it
? I'll then rebase my patches on top of that (I won't repost them as that
shouldn't make any difference in the patches themselves).
> > As previously, the series start with miscellaneous cleanup and rework
> > patches that slowly get the code in shape. Patches 14/29 and 15/29 then
> > rework the GPIO code to split real GPIOs and function GPIOS in two
> > gpio_chip instances. Patches 16/29 to 22/29 are more miscellaneous
> > cleanups to prepare for patch 23/29 that adds support for sparse GPIO
> > numbering (this was the major issue with v2). Patch 29/29 implements real
> > pinctrl and pinmux support.
> >
> > This pinctrl and pinmux implementation simply replaces the existing one.
> > This should be safe as I've verified that the pinctrl and pinmux APIs are
> > not used by any SuperH or SH Mobile board code or driver.
> >
> > I consider this set as ready to be queued for v3.10. As with the previous
> > PFC patch sets there are dependencies between board code changes and
> > sh-pfc changes, so it would be easier to merge everything through the ARM
> > tree.
> >
> > Please note that patch "ARM: shmobile: sh73a0: Support sparse GPIO
> > numbers"
> > touches both board code and sh-pfc code. This would be hard to avoid.
> >
> > Changes since v3:
> >
> > - Drop pinctrl core fields constification patch
> > - Replace pinctrl_add_gpio_range() with gpiochip_add_pin_range()
> >
> > Changes since v2:
> >
> > - Rebased on v3.9-rc1
> > - Constify fields in the pinctrl core
> > - Support sparse GPIO numbers
> > - Drop LCD(C) pin groups and functions (moved to another patch set)
> >
> > Changes since v1:
> >
> > - Port the bonito board to the pinmux API
> > - Set the pins gpio_chip dev field correctly
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v4 00/29] SH pinctrl and pinmux implementation
2013-03-08 10:55 [PATCH v4 00/29] SH pinctrl and pinmux implementation Laurent Pinchart
2013-03-08 15:25 ` Simon Horman
2013-03-08 15:43 ` Laurent Pinchart
@ 2013-03-09 4:28 ` Simon Horman
2013-03-11 20:14 ` Laurent Pinchart
` (4 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Simon Horman @ 2013-03-09 4:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sh
On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 04:43:11PM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> On Friday 08 March 2013 16:25:53 Simon Horman wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 11:55:41AM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > Here's the fourth version of the SuperH and SH Mobile pin controllers
> > > (PFC) pinctrl and pinmux support patches. The patches are available from
> > > my git tree at
> > >
> > > git://linuxtv.org/pinchartl/fbdev.git pinmux/3.9/pinctrl
> > >
> > > The patches are based on top of the following two commits from Linus'
> > > pinctrl tree:
> > >
> > > 022ab148d28e8 "pinctrl: Declare operation structures as const"
> > > a72149e82b65b "pinctrl: core: use devres_release() instead of
> > > devres_destroy()"
> >
> > I assume that I should make a branch based on a branch which includes
> > those commits.
> >
> > Linus, is there a stable branch that includes those commits at this time?
>
> 022ab148d28e8 is in Linus' for-next branch, so I think it should be stable.
>
> > > merged into the pinmux/3.9/base branch in my tree, as well as the "ARM:
> > > shmobile: marzen: Include mmc/host.h" patch hand-picked from the mailing
> > > list to fix a compilation breakage.
> >
> > Thanks, I'll send that as a fix inclusion in 3.9.
>
> Could you create a branch based on v3.9-rc1 + the mmc fix + anything you deem
> appropriate and merge 022ab148d28e8 from
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/linusw/linux-pinctrl.git into it
> ? I'll then rebase my patches on top of that (I won't repost them as that
> shouldn't make any difference in the patches themselves).
Sure.
I have made a merge of the fixes branch with Linus's for-next branch
and pushed the result as a new pinmux-base branch.
I am still a little undecided about what to do about handling
pinmux changes for kzm9g-reference. But I think the best option
may be to base them on top of pinmux-base.
I agree there is no need to repost your patches at this stage.
> > > As previously, the series start with miscellaneous cleanup and rework
> > > patches that slowly get the code in shape. Patches 14/29 and 15/29 then
> > > rework the GPIO code to split real GPIOs and function GPIOS in two
> > > gpio_chip instances. Patches 16/29 to 22/29 are more miscellaneous
> > > cleanups to prepare for patch 23/29 that adds support for sparse GPIO
> > > numbering (this was the major issue with v2). Patch 29/29 implements real
> > > pinctrl and pinmux support.
> > >
> > > This pinctrl and pinmux implementation simply replaces the existing one.
> > > This should be safe as I've verified that the pinctrl and pinmux APIs are
> > > not used by any SuperH or SH Mobile board code or driver.
> > >
> > > I consider this set as ready to be queued for v3.10. As with the previous
> > > PFC patch sets there are dependencies between board code changes and
> > > sh-pfc changes, so it would be easier to merge everything through the ARM
> > > tree.
> > >
> > > Please note that patch "ARM: shmobile: sh73a0: Support sparse GPIO
> > > numbers"
> > > touches both board code and sh-pfc code. This would be hard to avoid.
> > >
> > > Changes since v3:
> > >
> > > - Drop pinctrl core fields constification patch
> > > - Replace pinctrl_add_gpio_range() with gpiochip_add_pin_range()
> > >
> > > Changes since v2:
> > >
> > > - Rebased on v3.9-rc1
> > > - Constify fields in the pinctrl core
> > > - Support sparse GPIO numbers
> > > - Drop LCD(C) pin groups and functions (moved to another patch set)
> > >
> > > Changes since v1:
> > >
> > > - Port the bonito board to the pinmux API
> > > - Set the pins gpio_chip dev field correctly
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Laurent Pinchart
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sh" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v4 00/29] SH pinctrl and pinmux implementation
2013-03-08 10:55 [PATCH v4 00/29] SH pinctrl and pinmux implementation Laurent Pinchart
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2013-03-09 4:28 ` Simon Horman
@ 2013-03-11 20:14 ` Laurent Pinchart
2013-03-13 5:07 ` Linus Walleij
` (3 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Laurent Pinchart @ 2013-03-11 20:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sh
Hi Simon,
On Saturday 09 March 2013 05:28:27 Simon Horman wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 04:43:11PM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > On Friday 08 March 2013 16:25:53 Simon Horman wrote:
> > > On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 11:55:41AM +0100, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > Here's the fourth version of the SuperH and SH Mobile pin controllers
> > > > (PFC) pinctrl and pinmux support patches. The patches are available
> > > > from my git tree at
> > > >
> > > > git://linuxtv.org/pinchartl/fbdev.git pinmux/3.9/pinctrl
> > > >
> > > > The patches are based on top of the following two commits from Linus'
> > > > pinctrl tree:
> > > >
> > > > 022ab148d28e8 "pinctrl: Declare operation structures as const"
> > > > a72149e82b65b "pinctrl: core: use devres_release() instead of
> > > > devres_destroy()"
> > >
> > > I assume that I should make a branch based on a branch which includes
> > > those commits.
> > >
> > > Linus, is there a stable branch that includes those commits at this
> > > time?
> >
> > 022ab148d28e8 is in Linus' for-next branch, so I think it should be
> > stable.
> >
> > > > merged into the pinmux/3.9/base branch in my tree, as well as the
> > > > "ARM: shmobile: marzen: Include mmc/host.h" patch hand-picked from the
> > > > mailing list to fix a compilation breakage.
> > >
> > > Thanks, I'll send that as a fix inclusion in 3.9.
> >
> > Could you create a branch based on v3.9-rc1 + the mmc fix + anything you
> > deem appropriate and merge 022ab148d28e8 from
> > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/linusw/linux-pinctrl.git
> > into it ? I'll then rebase my patches on top of that (I won't repost them
> > as that shouldn't make any difference in the patches themselves).
>
> Sure.
>
> I have made a merge of the fixes branch with Linus's for-next branch
> and pushed the result as a new pinmux-base branch.
Thank you. I've rebased my tree on top of that. You can pull the
pinmux/3.9/pfc-funcs branch (based on top of pinmux/3.9/pinctrl, so you will
get this patch set as well as "[PATCH v3 00/64] PFC pinctrl functions for
sh7372, sh73a0, r8a7740 and r8a7779") directly.
> I am still a little undecided about what to do about handling
> pinmux changes for kzm9g-reference. But I think the best option
> may be to base them on top of pinmux-base.
Or on top of my patches ?
> I agree there is no need to repost your patches at this stage.
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v4 00/29] SH pinctrl and pinmux implementation
2013-03-08 10:55 [PATCH v4 00/29] SH pinctrl and pinmux implementation Laurent Pinchart
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2013-03-11 20:14 ` Laurent Pinchart
@ 2013-03-13 5:07 ` Linus Walleij
2013-03-13 10:24 ` Simon Horman
` (2 subsequent siblings)
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Linus Walleij @ 2013-03-13 5:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sh
On Sat, Mar 9, 2013 at 5:28 AM, Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au> wrote:
> I have made a merge of the fixes branch with Linus's for-next branch
> and pushed the result as a new pinmux-base branch.
Hm you shouldn't be basing anything on for-next in the pinctrl tree because
that is rebased all the time. If you need to base off the pinctrl tree, use
the "devel" branch, after handshake with me.
Yours,
Linus Walleij
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v4 00/29] SH pinctrl and pinmux implementation
2013-03-08 10:55 [PATCH v4 00/29] SH pinctrl and pinmux implementation Laurent Pinchart
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2013-03-13 5:07 ` Linus Walleij
@ 2013-03-13 10:24 ` Simon Horman
2013-03-13 17:27 ` Linus Walleij
2013-03-14 9:12 ` Simon Horman
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Simon Horman @ 2013-03-13 10:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sh
On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 06:07:46AM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 9, 2013 at 5:28 AM, Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au> wrote:
>
> > I have made a merge of the fixes branch with Linus's for-next branch
> > and pushed the result as a new pinmux-base branch.
>
> Hm you shouldn't be basing anything on for-next in the pinctrl tree because
> that is rebased all the time. If you need to base off the pinctrl tree, use
> the "devel" branch, after handshake with me.
Sure, I can rebase on the devel branch.
Can you give me an "ok" to do that and by implication push a
branch based on devel through arm-soc?
Thanks
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v4 00/29] SH pinctrl and pinmux implementation
2013-03-08 10:55 [PATCH v4 00/29] SH pinctrl and pinmux implementation Laurent Pinchart
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2013-03-13 10:24 ` Simon Horman
@ 2013-03-13 17:27 ` Linus Walleij
2013-03-14 9:12 ` Simon Horman
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Linus Walleij @ 2013-03-13 17:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sh
On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 06:07:46AM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
>> On Sat, Mar 9, 2013 at 5:28 AM, Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au> wrote:
>>
>> > I have made a merge of the fixes branch with Linus's for-next branch
>> > and pushed the result as a new pinmux-base branch.
>>
>> Hm you shouldn't be basing anything on for-next in the pinctrl tree because
>> that is rebased all the time. If you need to base off the pinctrl tree, use
>> the "devel" branch, after handshake with me.
>
> Sure, I can rebase on the devel branch.
> Can you give me an "ok" to do that and by implication push a
> branch based on devel through arm-soc?
Yes the top of that branch should be OK, I hope we do not
screw anything up, then we will notice :-)
Yours,
Linus Walleij
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH v4 00/29] SH pinctrl and pinmux implementation
2013-03-08 10:55 [PATCH v4 00/29] SH pinctrl and pinmux implementation Laurent Pinchart
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2013-03-13 17:27 ` Linus Walleij
@ 2013-03-14 9:12 ` Simon Horman
7 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Simon Horman @ 2013-03-14 9:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sh
On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 06:27:14PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au> wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 06:07:46AM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> >> On Sat, Mar 9, 2013 at 5:28 AM, Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au> wrote:
> >>
> >> > I have made a merge of the fixes branch with Linus's for-next branch
> >> > and pushed the result as a new pinmux-base branch.
> >>
> >> Hm you shouldn't be basing anything on for-next in the pinctrl tree because
> >> that is rebased all the time. If you need to base off the pinctrl tree, use
> >> the "devel" branch, after handshake with me.
> >
> > Sure, I can rebase on the devel branch.
> > Can you give me an "ok" to do that and by implication push a
> > branch based on devel through arm-soc?
>
> Yes the top of that branch should be OK, I hope we do not
> screw anything up, then we will notice :-)
Thanks!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread