[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140225230721.GA2927@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 08:07:21 +0900
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc: "Opensource [Anthony Olech]" <anthony.olech.opensource@...semi.com>,
Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
David Dajun Chen <david.chen@...semi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V1 2/3] MFD: da9052: Add new DA9053 BC chip variant
On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 12:40:50PM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> > The advice here is usually that sending against -next is a good proxy
> > for sending against the individual tree without having to figure out all
> > the different trees - almost all of the time the effect is the same.
> > This only applies when sending patches via e-mail, for git pulls it's an
> > absolute no of course.
> Good point. But it's worth reiterating that this should only be done
> if you have dependencies which haven't yet reached Mainline.
It can be worth doing anyway with a subsystem that's actively developed
since sometimees the dependencies are the other way - the APIs in Linus'
tree may have gone away.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists