linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4] dw_dmac: introduce generic DMA binding for DT

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: <201302201110.07485.arnd@arndb.de>
Date:	Wed, 20 Feb 2013 11:10:07 +0000
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>
Cc:	Dan Williams <djbw@...com>, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org,
	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.jf.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] dw_dmac: introduce generic DMA binding for DT

On Wednesday 20 February 2013, Vinod Koul wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 09:50:25AM +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Wednesday 20 February 2013, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > > Since there is still churn, would it make sense if I just revert the SPEAr13xx
> > > patch (your first patch) and send a pull request to Linus.
> > > Since there are no users and not much testing has been done, I think we can push
> > > these to 3.10 via arm-soc/slave-dma tree.
> > > 
> > > Gives more testing and usage will go along as well.
> > > Since merge window is open, I would like my pull to go soonish and not churn the
> > > tree much.
> > 
> > Reverting the SPEAr13xx would definitely help, yes. The reason why I'd also like
> > to see the second patch get merged is so that we can do the SPEAr changes in 3.10
> > without having an interdependency between the trees. I tried very hard to
> > make the patch have a minimal impact on the non-DT code path to avoid regressions.
> Ok, i have applied your revert patch. Will send the PULL to linus by friday.

Ok, thanks.

> > Maybe you can send your tree now with just the revert applied, and then send the
> > other one separately next week along with any bug fixes that may have accumulated
> > by then?
> And then makes sense to send second PULL with fixes accumulated and the second
> patch, so that 3.10 is easier for all.  think we can compact() patch is second
> request as well

Yes, sounds good.

	Arnd
--
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/