[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1411150154280.3909@nanos>
Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2014 02:09:29 +0100 (CET)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Anatol Pomozov <anatol.pomozov@...il.com>
cc: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org" <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] timekeeping: Move persistent clock registration code
from ARM to kernel
On Fri, 14 Nov 2014, Anatol Pomozov wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 4:18 PM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
> >> So what I suppose to do with my patch? If it does not work could
> >> anyone provide patch that removes ARM arch dependency from
> >> tegra20_timer.c?
> >
> > Huch? You want other people to solve your problems?
>
> This is not the point. I provided patch that fixes the issue. Other
> people said that they have ideas how to do it different (and better)
> way. So I am asking to share these ideas represented as a patch.
That's not the way it works.
You sent a patch to solve an problem which you are facing.
Now the people who review the patch think that there is a better
approach than moving code from arm/ to the timekeeping core code.
So it's up to you to come up with a patch which solves the problem in
the right way.
Thanks,
tglx
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists