From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752884AbbC1Cfr (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Mar 2015 22:35:47 -0400 Received: from mout.kundenserver.de ([212.227.126.187]:53585 "EHLO mout.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752284AbbC1Cfp (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Mar 2015 22:35:45 -0400 From: Arnd Bergmann To: Robert Jarzmik Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] mfd: lubbock_cplds: add lubbock IO board Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2015 03:35:15 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.12.2 (Linux/3.8.0-35-generic; KDE/4.3.2; x86_64; ; ) Cc: "Greg Kroah-Hartman" , Lee Jones , Nicolas Pitre , Rob Herring , Pawel Moll , Mark Rutland , Ian Campbell , Kumar Gala , Daniel Mack , Haojian Zhuang , Samuel Ortiz , Grant Likely , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, "Russell King - ARM Linux" , "Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov" References: <20150216130549.GF14545@x1> <20150325140725.GA11499@kroah.com> <871tkbxwup.fsf@free.fr> In-Reply-To: <871tkbxwup.fsf@free.fr> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201503280335.16280.arnd@arndb.de> X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:qD0f/lONX32AR67tdEZUTZPHpSTTRE8y5+zgQUCRKK2UOJB996N bRKj18inhnBHLQOFTYEZYeBByd+lfuj5VJ0711wz7TnW483r2Zw+dIFkVVtQ0gZnOafdvx/ c3DEx7KYDFNPc/iM/h8HFt3Tm6mp0dTVeIigZiSpQffbT7MA0ZTKQnZAt+Zg/7kky2ceZOT BtdL6Tg4qyw07+gBMRQXg== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1; Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thursday 26 March 2015, Robert Jarzmik wrote: > > Greg Kroah-Hartman writes: > > > On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 05:02:57PM +0100, Robert Jarzmik wrote: > >> If there is no solution, I'll fallback through arch/arm/plat-pxa, not very nice, > >> but it has to land somewhere, I don't want lubbock to remain broken. > > > > drivers/platform/arm ? > Most certainly. > > I'll submit that to drivers/platform/arm/pxa, and maintain that pxa tree. As for > drivers/platform/arm, do you want also maintainers to step up, or will you take > the review/merge burden ? > I'd much prefer not to add drivers/platform/arm, which would make it too easy to add random stuff there. What is the problem with leaving it in mach-pxa? Arnd