On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 08:09:47PM -0800, Eric Anholt wrote: > Stefan Wahren <i...@lategoodbye.de> writes: > > > Hi Remi, > > > > Am 07.12.2015 um 19:17 schrieb Remi Pommarel: > >> Hi Stefan, > >> > >> On Sun, Dec 06, 2015 at 10:16:25PM +0100, Stefan Wahren wrote: > >>> Hi Remi, > >>> > >>> please send this patch to devicet...@vger.kernel.org. > >> > >> Ok, just to be sure I understand the process here. I should resend a new > >> version of the whole patchset including the devicetree mailing list as > >> recipent. Then the first 3 patches will eventually get pushed by a clock > >> subsystem maintainer. And finally this last patch will be pushed by a > >> devicetree maintainer. > >> > >> Am I right here ? > > > > sorry for the confusion. I mean that you send a copy to > > devicet...@vger.kernel.org so subscribers have a chance to review. > > > > I'm not sure but according to your subject you suggest that this dts > > patch should go through clock subsystem which isn't optimal. This should > > be better applied by Stephen or Eric. > > It would be applied by me, but that's for me to worry about, not the > patch submitter. The subject prefix would be "ARM: bcm2835: ", but > that's trivial for me to fix when applying, not the kind of thing worth > asking for a respin for.
Thanks for review. I'll submit dt patch to devicet...@vger.kernel.org for review. Is it better to submit the whole patchset (patch 1 to 4) to provide some context for the device tree patch or just this patch alone ? Best Regards, -- Remi -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
