Hi, On Wed, Mar 06 2013, Stephen Warren wrote: > On 02/20/2013 11:35 AM, Rhyland Klein wrote: >> The structs wrapped with the SOC ifdefs are small enough where having >> them always there shouldn't be a big overhead. Removing the ifdefs >> also makes the code a little cleaner. > > I think patches 3 and 4 of this series can go through either the MMC > tree (I checked there are no conflicts with the MMC patch I have to take > through the Tegra tree), or the Tegra tree (since I'm taking another > Tegra MMC patch though there), both without any dependency issues. > > It's your call. Let me know if you want me to take them through the > Tegra tree with an ack. Or, if you want to take them through the MMC > tree that's fine too. If you need them reposted to see the content, let > me know, or they're at:
Via the MMC tree with an ack sounds good, just for the mundane reason that I like my "highlights for 3.10" pull request to Linus to mention when support for new MMC hardware is added, and it won't do that if the tegra110 patch is coming through your tree. Thanks, - Chris. -- Chris Ball <c...@laptop.org> <http://printf.net/> One Laptop Per Child -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
