Linus, On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 03:45:42PM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Sebastian Hesselbarth > <sebastian.hesselba...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 11/21/2012 10:59 AM, Linus Walleij wrote: > >> On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 10:39 AM, Sebastian Hesselbarth > >> <sebastian.hesselba...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> This patch relies on a patch set for mvebu pinctrl taken through > >>> Linus' pinctrl branch. As there is no other platform than Dove > >>> involved, I suggest to take it though Jason's tree to avoid any > >>> further conflicts. > >> > >> Sounds like a plan. So you have some commit history pulled > >> in from the pinctrl tree in the MVEBU tree? > > > > I am referring to patches for a pinctrl/mvebu subfolder. IIRC Thomas > > posted that patch a while ago. Jason is currently sorting things out > > for mvebu pull requests. I guess both can comment on your question, > > as I don't fully understand it. > > So what I mean is that the patches creating pinctrl/mvebu is in the > pinctrl tree, so if patches in the MVEBU tree depend on these, > then it must have pulled in a branch from pinctrl or applied the > same patches in that tree too (which is OK *sometimes*).
Yes, Thomas and Gregory informed me of the pinctrl dependency and said they were using for-next from the pinctrl tree. I've used that branch to merge and build successfully. Is that ok in practice or is there a more specific branch I should pull in as a dependency? thx, Jason. -- 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/
