Re: [PATCH] fsldma: use PCI Read Multiple command

[Dan Williams]

Kumar Gala wrote:
> 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:
> > > > On Apr 27, 2009, at 3:49 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Timur Tabi <timur@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > 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.
> > > > I'm going through patches for .31.. Should I still pick this up?   
> > > > Going
> > > > forward should I pick up fsldma patches?
> > > I'm fine with that, but you should probably talk to Li Yang (added to
> > > CC). He's gotten in contact with me a few times recently.
> > I am fine with both ways for this patch as it is only related to
> > 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.

I'll take fsldma patches through the dmaengine tree with Leo's 
ack/sign-off.  That last request was a one-off because I had nothing 
else to push and the discussion was very architecture specific.

Thanks,
Dan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/