From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ozlabs.org (ozlabs.org [203.10.76.45]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mx.ozlabs.org", Issuer "CA Cert Signing Authority" (verified OK)) by bilbo.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 34CD4B7187 for ; Sat, 13 Jun 2009 01:05:48 +1000 (EST) Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 86F3DDDD0B for ; Sat, 13 Jun 2009 01:05:47 +1000 (EST) Message-Id: <24633D89-D4EC-4C27-8B7F-3992EFE50989@kernel.crashing.org> From: Kumar Gala To: Li Yang In-Reply-To: <2a27d3730906120223w9f30b7ewfd22eb328e3a23d3@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v935.3) Subject: Re: [PATCH] fsldma: use PCI Read Multiple command Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 10:03:27 -0500 References: <49F608B7.9080409@ovro.caltech.edu> <49F60A3A.4060402@freescale.com> <49F61416.8040501@ovro.caltech.edu> <49F614FC.70000@freescale.com> <20090427204213.GA4960@ovro.caltech.edu> <49F619C4.20100@freescale.com> <09185A86-F744-4302-A78A-04E1FFFA32BD@kernel.crashing.org> <20090611151750.GB9323@ovro.caltech.edu> <2a27d3730906120223w9f30b7ewfd22eb328e3a23d3@mail.gmail.com> Cc: David Hawkins , Ira Snyder , Liu Dave-R63238 , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Dan Williams , Timur Tabi List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Jun 12, 2009, at 4:23 AM, Li Yang wrote: > On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 11:17 PM, Ira Snyder > wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 09:45:26PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: >>> >>> On Apr 27, 2009, at 3:49 PM, Dan Williams wrote: >>> >>>> On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Timur Tabi >>>> wrote: >>>>> Adding Kumar to the CC: list, since he might pick up the patch. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Acked-by: Dan Williams >>>> >>>> I agree with taking this through Kumar's tree. >>> >>> I'm going through patches for .31.. Should I still pick this up? >>> Going >>> forward should I pick up fsldma patches? >>> >> >> I'm fine with that, but you should probably talk to Li Yang (added to >> CC). He's gotten in contact with me a few times recently. > > I am fine with both ways for this patch as it is only related to > Freescale register details. But in general I think patches should go > through functional subsystem, as they usually would need insight of > the subsystem architecture. I prefer the way that the patch acked or > signed-off by Freescale guys and push upstream through Dan's tree as > most other subsystems did. Unless Dan prefers to ack the subsystem > architectural part of each patch and have them pushed other way. I agree w/this and just wanting to see what Dan's preference is. - k