From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756994AbaHHOpb (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Aug 2014 10:45:31 -0400 Received: from gw-1.arm.linux.org.uk ([78.32.30.217]:43999 "EHLO pandora.arm.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752570AbaHHOp3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Aug 2014 10:45:29 -0400 Date: Fri, 8 Aug 2014 15:45:10 +0100 From: Russell King - ARM Linux To: Jassi Brar Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Tetsuya Takinishi , Mollie Wu , Arnd Bergmann , Mark Brown , lkml , Andy Green , Grant Likely , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" Subject: Re: Request to include Mailbox tree in linux-next Message-ID: <20140808144510.GF30282@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <20140808142912.7bf68229@canb.auug.org.au> <20140808103021.GA30282@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 08:03:01PM +0530, Jassi Brar wrote: > On 8 August 2014 16:00, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 02:29:12PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > >> Hi Jassi, > >> > >> On Wed, 6 Aug 2014 12:25:49 +0530 Jassi Brar wrote: > >> > > >> > The framework for Mailbox has undergone 10 revisions over the last > >> > one year, which has garnered support in the form of 'Reviewed-by' and > >> > 'looks good enough to be merged in this window' from people in the CC > >> > list. > >> > > >> > Could you please add it to linux-next? > >> > Tree: git://git.linaro.org/landing-teams/working/fujitsu/integration.git > >> > Branch: mailbox-for-3.17 > >> > Contact: Jassi Brar > >> > >> This is really late for v3.17. The purpose of linux-next is to > >> discover interactions between trees before they are pulled into Linus' > >> tree and to do some cross architecture build checking. Adding a tree > >> during the merge window is not very helpful to that. > > > > +1. > > > > The same goes for any tree which is part of linux-next. > > > > Having a tree in linux-next carries with it the responsibility that the > > tree owner abides by the kernel development cycle, which includes > > respecting the moratorium on merging new development into branch(es) > > which are part of linux-next during an actively open merge window. > > > I wasn't aware that any new subsystem must live at least one cycle in > linux-next, I submitted it for inclusion just because someone > suggested that as the next best thing to merging this cycle. Not "one cycle" but the general rule is that changes must be queued in linux-next at the latest one week before the merge window opens. What is a definite no-no is introducing new development which haven't been seen in linux-next during an open merge window. -- FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.5Mbps down 400kbps up according to speedtest.net.