On 09/21/2010 11:02 AM, Christian Robottom Reis wrote: > On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 12:15:17AM +0200, Robert Schwebel wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 09:19:49AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: >>> o Jason Hui: iMX51 work on device trees. Need assignment. >>> Reviewed BSP review, need to send results to Loïc et al. >> >> It would be great to see more MX51 things on ALKML (and devicetree >> things on devtree-discuss). Up to now I have the impression that there >> is still much work done behind closed doors, which is bad if we want to >> have better mainline support for i.MX5x. > > That's a good point and there's nothing behind closed doors happening > that I have requested -- in fact, I mandate the opposite. I would assume > that Jeremy has been posting device tree mx51 work to the > devtree-discuss ML, and that mx51 patches coming out of the KWG and PMWG > are also posted to ALKML; correct me if I'm wrong. > > It may be that it's just very little happening :-/
In fact, that is the case. There has been no work on it in 4 months. The main area of work since then has been on a common struct clk to enable DT clock support. The MX51 DT work is here: http://kernel.ubuntu.com/git?p=jk/dt/linux-2.6.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/mx51 Rob _______________________________________________ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
