Re: 2.6.32 -mm merge plans

Mike Frysinger
2009-09-16T03:51:44Z

On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 20:18, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Sep 2009 09:03:57 +0900 Paul Mundt wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 04:15:35PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
>> > mtd-make-onenand-genericc-more-generic.patch
>> > mtd-nand-add-page-parameter-to-all-read_page-read_page_raw-apis.patch
>> > mtd-nand-add-new-ecc-mode-ecc_hw_oob_first.patch
>> > mtd-nand-davinci-add-4-bit-ecc-support-for-large-page-nand-chips.patch
>> > mtd-nand-davinci-add-4-bit-ecc-support-for-large-page-nand-chips-update.patch
>> > mtd-jffs2-fix-read-buffer-overflow.patch
>> > mtd-prevent-a-read-from-eraseregions.patch
>> > mtd-prevent-a-read-from-regions.patch
>> > mtd-jedec_probe-fix-nec-upd29f064115-detection.patch
>> > mtdpart-memory-accessor-interface-for-mtd-layer.patch
>> >
>> >   -> dwmw2
>>
>> Regarding mtd-make-onenand-genericc-more-generic.patch, I'm not really
>> sure what happened. To recap:
>>
>> It was posted to the mtd list here:
>>
>> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2009-August/026805.html
>>
>> Kyungmin objected to the driver name change here:
>>
>> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2009-August/026807.html
>>
>> I pointed out that the rough rationale for the name change here:
>>
>> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2009-August/026808.html
>>
>> and offered to redo the patch keeping the old name if Kyungmin felt the
>> rationale wasn't valid, but received no reply. Subsequently, Artem
>> mentioned that he had merged it in to his l2-mtd-2.6.git tree here:
>>
>> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2009-August/026866.html
>>
>> which subsequently seems to not actually have happened.
>>
>> This is a pretty trivial patch, and I don't mind respinning it in
>> whatever form folks are content with. I had assumed given the mention
>> that it had been merged in to the l2 tree that the rationale was
>> sufficient for merging.
>
> I don't think that Artem's tree is in linux-next, so I have no
> visibility of what's happening with that patch.
>
> I do think that Artem's tree should be in linux-next.
>
> I guess I'll just hose the patch at dwmw2 and will see what happens.  I
> sent it on Aug 6, with no effect.

i guess i shouldnt try and bounce a few more mtd patches through you huh ...

http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/vapier/blackfin.git;a=shortlog;h=for-mtd

hopefully they make it in this cycle (they were posted a while ago to
the mtd lists w/feedback addressed)
-mike