[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAK=WgbYwk=DEgNFKn11BHpS=V_m=6Okf=i7w5NkLHwu8ryMaJg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2015 19:31:16 +0300
From: Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@...ery.com>
To: Tim Bird <tbird20d@...il.com>
Cc: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...ymobile.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>, Suman Anna <s-anna@...com>,
"linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
Jeffrey Hugo <jhugo@...eaurora.org>,
Andy Gross <agross@...eaurora.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@...aro.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] DT: hwspinlock: Add binding documentation for
Qualcomm hwmutex
On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 7:22 PM, Tim Bird <tbird20d@...il.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 6:55 AM, Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@...ery.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 9:11 PM, Tim Bird <tbird20d@...il.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 9:40 PM, Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@...ery.com> wrote:
>>>> Sorry, I can't take this without a DT ack.
>>>
>>> Hmmm.
>>>
>>> The policy seems to be:
>>> "For driver (not subsystem) bindings: If you are comfortable with the
>>> binding, and it hasn't received an Acked-by from the devicetree
>>> maintainers after a few weeks, go ahead and take it."
>>>
>>> The syscon property is only relative to the qcom hwspinlock driver,
>>> (unless I'm missing something) and both Qualcomm and Sony devs are
>>> OK with it. So while an ACK from the DT side would be nice, I don't
>>> think it's required. This is exactly the type of delay that is really
>>> holding up a lot of out-of-tree code.
>>
>> Sorry, I do prefer to make sure Mark is OK with this devicetree patch,
>> especially since it wasn't clear whether Mark is entirely comfortable
>> with it in his last response.
>
> Just to be clear - do you personally have any objections to the patch?
No, but this patch is for a folder I don't maintain so I prefer
someone who does to take a look.
Mark did take a look, and said he's confused by this patch (see this thread).
Do you want me to ignore him and just send it to Linus anyway?
--
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