From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755377Ab2LMBRN (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Dec 2012 20:17:13 -0500 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:55145 "EHLO mail.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755130Ab2LMBRL (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Dec 2012 20:17:11 -0500 Message-ID: <50C92C61.8060104@zytor.com> Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2012 17:16:17 -0800 From: "H. Peter Anvin" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Grant Likely CC: Davide Ciminaghi , Jaswinder Singh , Will Deacon , Russell King - ARM Linux , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Dan Williams , "Koul, Vinod" , Linus Walleij , rubini , Wim Van Sebroeck , Chris Ball , David Brown , Nicolas Pitre , Ben Dooks , Viresh Kumar , "rajeev-dlh.kumar" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "giancarlo.asnaghi" Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/7] enable support for AMBA drivers under x86 References: <1355146956-6009-1-git-send-email-ciminaghi@gnudd.com> <50C92366.8030604@zytor.com> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.6 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 12/12/2012 05:10 PM, Grant Likely wrote: > On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 12:37 AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> OK, so I'm not 100% sure how to best handle this patchset. I can carry it >> in the x86 tree with the appropriate ACKs... which could lead to ugly merge >> conflicts, or we can ask the respective driver authors to take their bits... >> but that gives a sequencing problem (the core patchset depends on a bunch of >> outside trees in order to be tested.) >> >> Either way it is a late pull for 3.8 at best... however, the risk seems low >> so *maybe* that is acceptable. > > I'd put the whole series into a separate branch by itself and any > subsystems with problematic conflicts can merge it into their trees > also. I'm fine with putting it in the x86 tree for v3.9. I don't think > there is any huge rush on it. > That was pretty much my preferred option. I'll put it into tip:x86/amba. -hpa