[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160916101807.GV27974@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 11:18:07 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Johan Hovold <johan@...oldconsulting.com>,
Rui Miguel Silva <rmfrfs@...il.com>,
Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
Sandeep Patil <sspatil@...gle.com>,
Matt Porter <mporter@...nel.crashing.org>,
John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
Alex Elder <elder@...aro.org>, David Lin <dtwlin@...gle.com>,
Bryan O'Donoghue <pure.logic@...us-software.ie>,
Vaibhav Agarwal <vaibhav.agarwal@...aro.org>,
Mark Greer <mgreer@...malcreek.com>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Greybus driver subsystem for 4.9-rc1
On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 08:05:19AM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 03:45:53PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Sending a pull request for code that's never been seen upstream seems
> > completely premature.
> Hey, how does code get upstream then? :)
By having the actual code to the mailing list.
> As for the drivers all living under drivers/greybus/ I understand, but
> we need the greybus core present first before we can get the drivers in.
> How about we do what happened with IIO, we take the greybus core code in
> drivers/greybus/ and put the drivers in staging, and then move them out
> of staging into the "real" portion of the kernel as they get reviewed
> and accepted?
Yes, staging would be appropriate for unreviewed code.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (474 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists