linux-kernel - Re: [GIT PULL v2] at91: fixes for 3.7-rc7

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:	Tue, 20 Nov 2012 23:03:03 -0800
From:	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>
To:	Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>
Cc:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org,
	Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@...el.com>,
	Chris Ball <cjb@...top.org>,
	Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj@...osoft.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL v2] at91: fixes for 3.7-rc7

Hi,


On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 09:59:27AM +0100, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
> Arnd, Olof,
> 
> Just for the record, I do not want to put pressure at a such late time in
> the 3.7-rc process. So, I just reworked that pull-request because the previous
> one was wrong:
> - wrong patch content (DT nodes with wrong size)
> - not all tags in patches (Jean-Christophe and Arnd tags were missing...)
> 
> Just to start from a sane base if I have to rebase this work for 3.8, I let you know
> that I have updated this tag...
> 
> The following changes since commit 641f3ce64b050961d454a0716bb6dbf528315aac:
> 
>   ARM: at91/usbh: fix overcurrent gpio setup (2012-11-16 10:46:29 +0100)
> 
> are available in the git repository at:
> 
>   git://github.com/at91linux/linux-at91.git tags/at91-fixes

The new patches seem to belong in an at91/dt branch, not in a fixes one.

I can pull in the previous fixes branch as an at91/fixes-non-critical for 3.8
if you want. There's no need to rebase them for this, is there? What is the
pinctrl dependency that you are talking about, are some of these patches needed
as prerequisites for pinctrl changes or the other way around?

Sorry if I've missed more elaborate emails on this and are asking repeat
questions. ;)

-Olof
--
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/