From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756284Ab2ADA6u (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Jan 2012 19:58:50 -0500 Received: from mailout1.samsung.com ([203.254.224.24]:47561 "EHLO mailout1.samsung.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756181Ab2ADA63 (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Jan 2012 19:58:29 -0500 X-AuditID: cbfee61a-b7b89ae000001a15-2a-4f03a43289f7 From: Kukjin Kim To: "'Stephen Rothwell'" , "'Olof Johansson'" , "'Arnd Bergmann'" , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, "'Mauro Carvalho Chehab'" , "'Vinod Koul'" , "'Linus'" Cc: linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20120104104758.26b0ca5268d10fbf7b95903a@canb.auug.org.au> In-reply-to: <20120104104758.26b0ca5268d10fbf7b95903a@canb.auug.org.au> Subject: RE: linux-next: interesting merges in the arm-soc tree Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2012 09:58:24 +0900 Message-id: <01bc01ccca7b$f6483fe0$e2d8bfa0$%kim@samsung.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Content-language: ko Thread-index: AczKcic43SD1TB/OQ6+E7H0onEYJ8gACBMAQ X-Brightmail-Tracker: AAAAAA== Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi all, > Hi, > I noticed that the arm-soc tree has merged in the v4l-dvb and the > slave-dma trees today. Is there some good reason for this? It fixes a I did slave-dma... Yes, I have created branch for samsung dma on top of slave-dma tree. Because samsung tree touched drivers/dma/pl330.c for samsung device tree then the arch/arm/common/pl330.c file have been merged into drivers/dma/pl330.c with touching samsung stuff and of course there are changes of drivers/dma/pl330.c in slave-dma as well. So I did... > few conflicts (but that is not excuse) and there may be dependencies in a > driver on the v4l-dvb tree (but maybe that means that that driver should > be merged via the v4l-dvb tree - it looks like the "at91/drivers" is > based on the v4l-dvb tree, so probably doesn't depend on anything else on > the arm-soc tree). > > If nothing else, are you sure that neither of those merged trees will > rebase? You have also just inherited any bugs in those two trees. I know, Vinod knows I merged his tree for above situation so he will not rebase that and Arnd will send that after merging of slave-dma into mainline during merge window. So I think, we will not see any problem. :) But if wrong, please let me know. Thanks. Best regards, Kgene. -- Kukjin Kim , Senior Engineer, SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.