From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Berg Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 0/5] net: rfkill: gpio: cleanup and a few new acpi ids Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 09:26:13 +0200 Message-ID: <1397201173.4420.0.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> References: <1396360976-28657-1-git-send-email-heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com> <1396946275.5936.2.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> <20140409100147.GB3083@xps8300> <5345680F.3040903@wwwdotorg.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Heikki Krogerus , Chen-Yu Tsai , Rhyland Klein , Marc Dietrich , Linus Walleij , Arnd Bergmann , Alexandre Courbot , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org To: Stephen Warren Return-path: In-Reply-To: <5345680F.3040903@wwwdotorg.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2014-04-09 at 09:32 -0600, Stephen Warren wrote: > > Stephen! Are you expecting any changes to board-paz00.c in this kernel > > cycle? If not, I think it would be easiest if Johannes, you take the > > whole set. What do you guys think? > > I can't predict the future, but the chances are pretty slim - that file > is pretty tiny and doesn't have much churn. > > The best approach is to put this series in its own topic branch. Then, > if any conflict does come up, I can simply merge the branch into the > Tegra treee and apply the conflicting patches on top. Ok, I'll do that. Shout now if you don't want these patches merged :) johannes