Re: [PATCH] gpio: Emma Mobile GPIO driver V2

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Thursday, May 17, 2012, Olof Johansson wrote:
> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 3:37 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Thursday, May 17, 2012, Olof Johansson wrote:
> >> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 1:05 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> > On Wednesday, May 16, 2012, Linus Walleij wrote:
> >> >> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 12:15 PM, Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > Do you guys have any preferences how to merge this?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Can I include it together with the EMEV2 SoC bits perhaps? That may be
> >> >> > easy so we can keep track of the platform data header file dependency.
> >> >>
> >> >> For ux500 I made a special "gpio and pins" branch and sent through ARM SoC.
> >> >
> >> > The problem is we have a patch depending on the $subject one in the EMEV2
> >> > series and it would be better to keep them both together if that's not
> >> > a big deal.
> >>
> >> Dependencies are fine, as long as they are not circular. You can
> >> either pull in the gpio/pins branch into the EMEV2 branch, or base it
> >> on it.
> >
> > I guess I'll try to merge the gpio/pins into the EMEV2 branch.
> 
> By the way, I should have mentioned that if the dependencies are only
> for building and not for context when applying patches, then it's
> sufficient to let us know in the pull request so we merge the branches
> in the right order when sending to Linus (so we maintain
> bisectability).

Well, eventually I have taken the GPIO patch from Magnus into the emev2 branch,
because that has been much more convenient to me (pull request sent already).

Thanks,
Rafael
--
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/