On Jun 12, 2009, at 4:23 AM, Li Yang wrote:
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 11:17 PM, Ira Snyder<iws@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 09:45:26PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote:I am fine with both ways for this patch as it is only related toOn Apr 27, 2009, at 3:49 PM, Dan Williams wrote:I'm fine with that, but you should probably talk to Li Yang (added to
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Timur Tabi <timur@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>I'm going through patches for .31.. Should I still pick this up? Going
Adding Kumar to the CC: list, since he might pick up the patch.Acked-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx>
I agree with taking this through Kumar's tree.
forward should I pick up fsldma patches?
CC). He's gotten in contact with me a few times recently.
Freescale register details. But in general I think patches should go
through functional subsystem, as they usually would need insight of
the subsystem architecture. I prefer the way that the patch acked or
signed-off by Freescale guys and push upstream through Dan's tree as
most other subsystems did. Unless Dan prefers to ack the subsystem
architectural part of each patch and have them pushed other way.
I agree w/this and just wanting to see what Dan's preference is.