linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4] Dove pinctrl fixes and DT enabling

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:	Wed, 21 Nov 2012 10:52:08 -0500
From:	Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>
To:	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc:	Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@...il.com>,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
	Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com>,
	Gregory CLEMENT <gregory.clement@...e-electrons.com>,
	Axel Lin <axel.lin@...ics.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Dove pinctrl fixes and DT enabling

Linus,

On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 03:45:42PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@...il.com> wrote:
> > On 11/21/2012 10:59 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
> >> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 10:39 AM, Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@...il.com>  wrote:
> >>> This patch relies on a patch set for mvebu pinctrl taken through
> >>> Linus' pinctrl branch. As there is no other platform than Dove
> >>> involved, I suggest to take it though Jason's tree to avoid any
> >>> further conflicts.
> >>
> >> Sounds like a plan. So you have some commit history pulled
> >> in from the pinctrl tree in the MVEBU tree?
> >
> > I am referring to patches for a pinctrl/mvebu subfolder. IIRC Thomas
> > posted that patch a while ago. Jason is currently sorting things out
> > for mvebu pull requests. I guess both can comment on your question,
> > as I don't fully understand it.
> 
> So what I mean is that the patches creating pinctrl/mvebu is in the
> pinctrl tree, so if patches in the MVEBU tree depend on these,
> then it must have pulled in a branch from pinctrl or applied the
> same patches in that tree too (which is OK *sometimes*).

Yes, Thomas and Gregory informed me of the pinctrl dependency and said
they were using for-next from the pinctrl tree.  I've used that branch
to merge and build successfully.  Is that ok in practice or is there a
more specific branch I should pull in as a dependency?

thx,

Jason.
--
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/