Message ID | 20181108083754.1746-1-peter.ujfalusi@ti.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Series | ASoC/ARM: Merge the davinci and omap audio directories | expand |
* Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@ti.com> [181108 08:36]: > I believe with v1 all of this can be merged via ASoC tree as the chances of > conflicts are low for the touched arch/arm files. But Sekhar and Tony can > correct me if I'm wrong. Good to see this :) Yes merging these changes via the ASoC tree makes sense to me. I will take a look and ack when you post the version without RFC. Regards, Tony
On 11/8/18 10:37 AM, Peter Ujfalusi wrote: > The series also includes patches to updated the arch/arm/ files (defconfigs, > source files using audio Kconfig symbols). > > I believe with v1 all of this can be merged via ASoC tree as the chances of > conflicts are low for the touched arch/arm files. But Sekhar and Tony can > correct me if I'm wrong. > > I think I have catched all (I hope) issues regarding to Kconfig thanks to the > various autobuild machines out there kindly testing my linux-next-wip branch. > > I would appreciate any testing comments before I send the v1! > I applied on top of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/sound.git commit abd97b7c53ac ("Merge branch 'asoc-4.21' into asoc-next"). Patches 2 and 6 didn't apply and 7-8 I skipped. For my functional testing none of those were required. For the sound/soc/{omap => ti} conversion you may add: Tested-by: Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@bitmer.com> Acked-by: Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@bitmer.com>
On 2018-11-11 18:37, Jarkko Nikula wrote: > On 11/8/18 10:37 AM, Peter Ujfalusi wrote: >> The series also includes patches to updated the arch/arm/ files (defconfigs, >> source files using audio Kconfig symbols). >> >> I believe with v1 all of this can be merged via ASoC tree as the chances of >> conflicts are low for the touched arch/arm files. But Sekhar and Tony can >> correct me if I'm wrong. >> >> I think I have catched all (I hope) issues regarding to Kconfig thanks to the >> various autobuild machines out there kindly testing my linux-next-wip branch. >> >> I would appreciate any testing comments before I send the v1! >> > I applied on top of > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/sound.git commit > abd97b7c53ac ("Merge branch 'asoc-4.21' into asoc-next"). > > Patches 2 and 6 didn't apply and 7-8 I skipped. For my functional > testing none of those were required. Hrm, the series was based on next-20181019, but I will keep on eye on these! > For the sound/soc/{omap => ti} conversion you may add: > > Tested-by: Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@bitmer.com> > Acked-by: Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@bitmer.com> Thank you! - Péter Texas Instruments Finland Oy, Porkkalankatu 22, 00180 Helsinki. Y-tunnus/Business ID: 0615521-4. Kotipaikka/Domicile: Helsinki
On Thu, Nov 08, 2018 at 10:37:45AM +0200, Peter Ujfalusi wrote: > Hi, > > This RFC series is on top of the omap-mcbsp cleanup series: > http://mailman.alsa-project.org/pipermail/alsa-devel/2018-November/141604.html This is all fine by me.
On 08/11/18 8:46 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > * Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@ti.com> [181108 08:36]: >> I believe with v1 all of this can be merged via ASoC tree as the chances of >> conflicts are low for the touched arch/arm files. But Sekhar and Tony can >> correct me if I'm wrong. > > Good to see this :) Yes merging these changes via the ASoC tree makes > sense to me. I will take a look and ack when you post the version > without RFC. Looks good to me too. And fine with the series getting merged through ASoC. But will appreciate an immutable commit over v4.20-rc1 in case I do end up queuing something that clashes with changes here (especially worried about the defconfig changes - those are notorious for merge conflicts, and are pain to resolve). I will test this once the non-RFC version is posted. Thanks, Sekhar