On Wed, 07 Dec 2016, Marek Vasut wrote: > On 12/07/2016 09:53 AM, Mika Westerberg wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 09:45:25AM +0000, Lee Jones wrote: > >> I'm happy either way. However if you take them, I will require a > >> pull-request to an immutable branch containing only these patches. > >> > >> If I take them, it won't be until v4.11, since we are half way though > >> -rc8 already and I would like them to soak in -next for at least a > >> couple of weeks. > > > > This series already missed v4.8 and v4.9 so I don't think there is a > > rush to get it for v4.10 either ;-) I'm fine if it goes for v4.11. > > Hmmmmmmmmmmm, that kinda sucks. Lee, are you positive this isn't 4.10 > material ?
The merge-window opens in 2 days. As I mentioned, I like patches to reside in -next for at least 1 maybe 2 RC cycles before merging. It's far to easy to accept code, then get bitten if/when it breaks after being merged by Linus. -- Lee Jones Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
