| Message ID | CAFr9PXnBb7OmOAMumDodC+0usWqRT-RXwC+YUHZ2Y43Xe_uTQQ@mail.gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Mainlined |
| Commit | c9a9f6a1f0fd67c3909ff0c813d2d9f8a4a63c30 |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [GIT,PULL] ARM: mstar for v5.14 v2 | expand |
On Sun, Jun 13, 2021 at 02:39:59AM +0900, Daniel Palmer wrote: > Hi Arnd, Olof, > > Here is a fixed version of the PR with my s-o-b for Romain's patch. > > Content is as before: > > - Romain has stepped up to clean up some of the ~300 patch backlog for > MStar and he added support for earlyprintk in the process. > - In an effort to do things properly I've moved work on the MStar > stuff from my personal github account to one for this project. So > people can find it I've added a link in MAINTAINERS. > > The following changes since commit 614124bea77e452aa6df7a8714e8bc820b489922: > > Linux 5.13-rc5 (2021-06-06 15:47:27 -0700) > > are available in the Git repository at: > > https://github.com/linux-chenxing/linux.git tags/mstar-5.14-v2 > > for you to fetch changes up to eb5e7693630c6039d040e428840be82b7e3a8614: > > MAINTAINERS: ARM/MStar/Sigmastar SoCs: Add a link to the MStar tree > (2021-06-13 02:12:18 +0900) > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Daniel Palmer (1): > MAINTAINERS: ARM/MStar/Sigmastar SoCs: Add a link to the MStar tree > > Romain Perier (1): > ARM: debug: add UART early console support for MSTAR SoCs > > MAINTAINERS | 1 + > arch/arm/Kconfig.debug | 11 +++++++++++ Hi, This time it seems like you based your branch on 5.14-rc5, which is a newer -rc than what we have the rest of our trees on. The general rule of thumb is to base it on the oldest meaningful rc for the release (rc1 or rc2, most of the time). We normally base our tree on rc2 or so, in this case I went forward to rc3 earlier. (Maybe you had the same base last time around, and I missed it -- my tooling failed out on the S-o-b checking before I noticed) To avoid another roundtrip here, I'll apply the two patches directly, but please keep it in mind in the future, especially once you have more material for a cycle. -Olof
On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 9:01 AM Daniel Palmer <daniel@0x0f.com> wrote: > > Hi Olof, > > On Wed, 16 Jun 2021 at 00:31, Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net> wrote: > > This time it seems like you based your branch on 5.14-rc5, which is a newer -rc > > than what we have the rest of our trees on. The general rule of thumb is to > > base it on the oldest meaningful rc for the release (rc1 or rc2, most of the > > time). We normally base our tree on rc2 or so, in this case I went forward to > > rc3 earlier. > > Sorry, I hadn't even thought of that but it makes sense. > > > (Maybe you had the same base last time around, and I missed it -- my tooling > > failed out on the S-o-b checking before I noticed) > > Last one was rc5 too. > > > To avoid another roundtrip here, I'll apply the two patches directly, but > > please keep it in mind in the future, especially once you have more material > > for a cycle. > > Thanks for doing that and the hand holding. I think I can manage to > get it right next time. :) Yeah, no worries. More or less every single maintainer has made similar mistakes at some point or other, especially during ramping up. > I have one DTS patch I would like to get into 5.14 for the watchdog > driver that was recently accepted. > Is it still ok to send a PR for that one or is it too late now? I > think I read the cut off is around rc6. You can still send it, either as a patch or as a pull request - your choice. -Olof
Hi Olof, On Wed, 16 Jun 2021 at 00:31, Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net> wrote: > This time it seems like you based your branch on 5.14-rc5, which is a newer -rc > than what we have the rest of our trees on. The general rule of thumb is to > base it on the oldest meaningful rc for the release (rc1 or rc2, most of the > time). We normally base our tree on rc2 or so, in this case I went forward to > rc3 earlier. Sorry, I hadn't even thought of that but it makes sense. > (Maybe you had the same base last time around, and I missed it -- my tooling > failed out on the S-o-b checking before I noticed) Last one was rc5 too. > To avoid another roundtrip here, I'll apply the two patches directly, but > please keep it in mind in the future, especially once you have more material > for a cycle. Thanks for doing that and the hand holding. I think I can manage to get it right next time. :) I have one DTS patch I would like to get into 5.14 for the watchdog driver that was recently accepted. Is it still ok to send a PR for that one or is it too late now? I think I read the cut off is around rc6. Thanks, Daniel
Hi Arnd, Olof, Here is a fixed version of the PR with my s-o-b for Romain's patch. Content is as before: - Romain has stepped up to clean up some of the ~300 patch backlog for MStar and he added support for earlyprintk in the process. - In an effort to do things properly I've moved work on the MStar stuff from my personal github account to one for this project. So people can find it I've added a link in MAINTAINERS. The following changes since commit 614124bea77e452aa6df7a8714e8bc820b489922: Linux 5.13-rc5 (2021-06-06 15:47:27 -0700) are available in the Git repository at: https://github.com/linux-chenxing/linux.git tags/mstar-5.14-v2 for you to fetch changes up to eb5e7693630c6039d040e428840be82b7e3a8614: MAINTAINERS: ARM/MStar/Sigmastar SoCs: Add a link to the MStar tree (2021-06-13 02:12:18 +0900) ---------------------------------------------------------------- Daniel Palmer (1): MAINTAINERS: ARM/MStar/Sigmastar SoCs: Add a link to the MStar tree Romain Perier (1): ARM: debug: add UART early console support for MSTAR SoCs MAINTAINERS | 1 + arch/arm/Kconfig.debug | 11 +++++++++++ 2 files changed, 12 insertions(+)