linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL 0/5] Second batch of arm-soc changes

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4F731FAA.5040708@gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 28 Mar 2012 09:26:50 -0500
From:	Rob Herring <robherring2@...il.com>
To:	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>
CC:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>, arm@...nel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL 0/5] Second batch of arm-soc changes

On 03/28/2012 02:13 AM, Olof Johansson wrote:
> Hi Linus,
> 
> Here is the second batch of arm-soc changes for this merge window. As Arnd
> mentioned with the first cover letter, most of these either had external
> dependencies that have now been pulled in, or just needed a bit more
> linux-next bake time due to getting picked up close to the 3.3 release.
> 
> 
> There are 128 non-merge patches, with a total diffstat of:
> 
>  346 files changed, 10790 insertions(+), 2792 deletions(-)
> 
> So, while there's been some good cleanups especially in the first branch,
> there's been a net addition of code:
> 
> * New SoC family support for Samsung EXYNOS5250: clock tables, driver
>   updates, etc means net gain in code.
> * Added device tree conversions. Once we start to sunset non-device tree
>   boards on the enabled platforms, we should see payback in code removal.
> * Common clock framework. As SoCs get converted over to the framework,
>   we should see more code removal from this as well.
> 
> 
> There are a handful of merge conflicts on the branches, nothing that
> should be too messy to sort out. I've described each conflict in the
> corresponding pull request, including how we've resolved them in our
> for-next branch.
> 

Why isn't lakml getting copied on emails 1-5? The same thing happened
with Arnd's pull request. Are they getting hung up for moderator approval?

Rob
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/