From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1422888AbXDYWrs (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Apr 2007 18:47:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1423399AbXDYWrs (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Apr 2007 18:47:48 -0400 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([65.172.181.25]:49354 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1422888AbXDYWrr (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Apr 2007 18:47:47 -0400 Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 15:47:36 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: cbou@mail.ru Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-discuss@handhelds.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] Battery class, external power framework, ds2760 battery Message-Id: <20070425154736.8c282208.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20070425210516.GA7078@zarina> References: <20070425154820.GA27300@zarina> <20070425130501.29a72fa2.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070425210516.GA7078@zarina> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.7 (GTK+ 2.8.17; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 01:05:16 +0400 Anton Vorontsov wrote: > On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 01:05:01PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 19:48:20 +0400 Anton Vorontsov wrote: > > > > > Andrew, would you please merge these patches into -mm? They're against > > > today's Linus git tree. > > > > Not for a while, sorry. We already have enough material queued for 2.6.22 > > and a lot of it is broken. So I am concentrating on fixing the remaining > > bugs in 2.6.21 and getting some of the new bugs we have prepared for 2.6.22 > > fixed up. > > Pity. Not trying to insist too hard, but this battery stuff can not break > anything pre-existing in kernel. That helps. > Also it's proven to work at least on five > different embedded devices PXA2xx and S3C (HP iPaqs h2200, rx3000, h5550 > and hx4700), with two battery types. Plus I believe that this battery > class more than suitable for OLPC guys (battery-2.6 tree). > > Anyway, maybe it's even better if we'll boil battery stuff a *bit* more. > > Also you didn't [directly] answered how long exactly we should wait, > should we come back after 2.6.21 or 2.6.22 release? In later case it's a > bit too long, isn't it? I'm not sure yet. I've saved away these patches. They seemed to get a decent review - let's aim for 2.6.22.