On 2016/12/15 4:06, Marty Plummer wrote: > On 12/12/2016 01:11 AM, Jiancheng Xue wrote: >> >> >> On 2016/12/9 23:07, Marty Plummer wrote: >>> On 12/04/2016 08:03 PM, Jiancheng Xue wrote: >>>> Hi Arnd, >>>> >>>> On 2016/10/17 21:48, Arnd Bergmann wrote: >>>>> On Monday, October 17, 2016 8:07:03 PM CEST Pan Wen wrote: >>>>>> Add support for some HiSilicon SoCs which depend on ARCH_MULTI_V5. >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Pan Wen <wen...@hisilicon.com> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Looks ok. I've added Marty Plummer to Cc, he was recently proposing >>>>> patches for Hi3520, which I think is closely related to this one. >>>>> Please try to work together so the patches don't conflict. It should >>>>> be fairly straightforward since you are basically doing the same >>>>> change here. >>>>> >>>> Marty hasn't give any replies about this thread until now. I reviewed >>>> the patch for Hi3520. And I think this patch won't conflict with Hi3520. >>>> Could you help us to ack this patch? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> Jiancheng >>>> >>>> >>> Hello all >>> >>> Sorry for my lack of activity, I've just been very busy lately with real >>> world considerations (well, real world but related to this; I have >>> another board based on hi3521a I've been tinkering with, trying to get >>> the manuf. to release gpl source via the sfconfservancy). I've not given >>> up on the project, however, since devices like this really need updates >>> in light of the recent botnets targeting devices of this sort as >>> manpower. >> >> Do you have any objections to this patch? If not, I hope this patch can >> be merged in 4.10. Thank you. >> >> Regards, >> Jiancheng >> >> >> > I have no objections. It looks like it might make my job a bit easier in > the end. I need to go ahead and rebase my patches anyways and fix up > earlier concerns raised about them, so go right ahead. > Hi Arnd,
Could this patch be accepted? Any further comments will be appreciated. Regards, Jiancheng