linux-kernel - ARM SoC tree, Was: Re: [PATCH 05/12] ARM: ixp4xx: use _

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]

Date:	Sat, 29 Sep 2012 12:35:17 +0200
From:	Krzysztof Halasa <khc@...waw.pl>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	arm@...nel.org
Subject: ARM SoC tree, Was: Re: [PATCH 05/12] ARM: ixp4xx: use __iomem for MMIO

Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> writes:

> Krzysztof, please apply in your next branch so this problem goes away in
> 3.8.

Right, I'll look at it.

> I realize it won't make 3.7 any more since the base patches are not
> in arm-soc, but it's bad if linux-next is broken.

Well, I'm not aware of any requirement to push my IXP4xx changes
exclusively through arm-soc. I believe I can still send my tree straight
to Linus.

My tree is fairly isolated (with one trivial patch in need of ack from
Russell, but I can remove that) and, to be honest, I can't see any
benefit to anyone, caused by sending through intermediate trees. In
fact, now that I have at last a bit of spare time to work on IXP4xx
again (acquired some IXP435 devices), such requirement would only mean
extra workload to me.

Could you please point me to a statement requiring eg. my changes to go
through arm-soc?

Thanks.
-- 
Krzysztof Halasa
--
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/