[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87y3ntlmmf.fsf@belgarion.home>
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2017 21:34:00 +0100
From: Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@...e.fr>
To: Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
Cc: linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, Eric Miao <eric.y.miao@...il.com>,
Haojian Zhuang <haojian.zhuang@...il.com>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Daniel Mack <daniel@...que.org>,
Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@...il.com>,
Philipp Zabel <philipp.zabel@...il.com>,
Paul Parsons <lost.distance@...oo.com>,
Jonathan Cameron <jic23@....ac.uk>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] i2c: pxa: move header file out of deprecated i2c folder
Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de> writes:
Hi Wolfram,
> Wouldn't it be even cleaner if patch 1 & 2 above would be swapped? First
> move the chunk, then rename the file?
Yeah sure.
> And is there a branch I should base this on? Currently, I am thinking of
> basing this patch on for-next and then submit it around rc1 time.
>
> Does that make sense to you?
Yeah that's good. I usually make my pull requests around -rc5, that gives enough
time to review and test on my side.
As for the base, for-next is exactly pxa/for-next as no patches are pending, so
go ahead and base your work on it please.
Cheers.
--
Robert
Powered by blists - more mailing lists