From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758170Ab2C1O0z (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Mar 2012 10:26:55 -0400 Received: from mail-gx0-f174.google.com ([209.85.161.174]:64206 "EHLO mail-gx0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755707Ab2C1O0y (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Mar 2012 10:26:54 -0400 Message-ID: <4F731FAA.5040708@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2012 09:26:50 -0500 From: Rob Herring User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:11.0) Gecko/20120310 Thunderbird/11.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Olof Johansson CC: Linus Torvalds , arm@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [GIT PULL 0/5] Second batch of arm-soc changes References: <1332918842-13521-1-git-send-email-olof@lixom.net> In-Reply-To: <1332918842-13521-1-git-send-email-olof@lixom.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 03/28/2012 02:13 AM, Olof Johansson wrote: > Hi Linus, > > Here is the second batch of arm-soc changes for this merge window. As Arnd > mentioned with the first cover letter, most of these either had external > dependencies that have now been pulled in, or just needed a bit more > linux-next bake time due to getting picked up close to the 3.3 release. > > > There are 128 non-merge patches, with a total diffstat of: > > 346 files changed, 10790 insertions(+), 2792 deletions(-) > > So, while there's been some good cleanups especially in the first branch, > there's been a net addition of code: > > * New SoC family support for Samsung EXYNOS5250: clock tables, driver > updates, etc means net gain in code. > * Added device tree conversions. Once we start to sunset non-device tree > boards on the enabled platforms, we should see payback in code removal. > * Common clock framework. As SoCs get converted over to the framework, > we should see more code removal from this as well. > > > There are a handful of merge conflicts on the branches, nothing that > should be too messy to sort out. I've described each conflict in the > corresponding pull request, including how we've resolved them in our > for-next branch. > Why isn't lakml getting copied on emails 1-5? The same thing happened with Arnd's pull request. Are they getting hung up for moderator approval? Rob