[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1331296301.1927.64.camel@deskari>
Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2012 14:31:41 +0200
From: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@...com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-next@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
Florian Tobias Schandinat <FlorianSchandinat@....de>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the arm-soc tree with the
omap_dss2 tree
On Fri, 2012-03-09 at 12:26 +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Friday 09 March 2012, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> > Merging omapdss tree through arm-soc would make sense for avoiding
> > conflicts, because almost every merge window there are some conflicts as
> > I often need to edit arch/arm files also. But I'm not sure if we have
> > ever had a conflict in drivers/video.
> >
> > But still, it's a video driver, and fbdev tree sounds more suited for a
> > video driver.
> >
> > So I don't know =). Basically it's ok for me either way also. But it
> > would be nice to have a standard way of doing this, instead of, for
> > example, merging omapdss sometimes through fbdev, sometimes through
> > arm-soc, depending on the conflicts...
>
> Actually, I did not suggest omapdss through arm-soc, the idea was that
> that the same branch gets merged into both the fbdev and the arm-soc
> trees and let the fbdev tree go to Linus first.
Ah, right, now I see. This sounds ok to me. I'll cc you when I send the
pull request to Florian (presuming the arrangement is fine for him).
Tomi
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists