On Wednesday 20 February 2013, Vinod Koul wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 09:50:25AM +, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Wednesday 20 February 2013, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > > Since there is still churn, would it make sense if I just revert the
> > > SPEAr13xx
> > > patch (your first patch) and send
On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 09:50:25AM +, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Wednesday 20 February 2013, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > Since there is still churn, would it make sense if I just revert the
> > SPEAr13xx
> > patch (your first patch) and send a pull request to Linus.
> > Since there are no users and n
On Wednesday 20 February 2013, Vinod Koul wrote:
> Since there is still churn, would it make sense if I just revert the SPEAr13xx
> patch (your first patch) and send a pull request to Linus.
> Since there are no users and not much testing has been done, I think we can
> push
> these to 3.10 via ar
On Fri, Feb 15, 2013 at 07:21:48PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> Hi Vinod,
>
> As Andy pointed out today, we don't have a good solution for the
> dw_dmac DT binding in linux-next yet. I have posted my series
> once before and then got distracted after getting feedback from
> Viresh, Andy and Russe
On 15 February 2013 23:51, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> As Andy pointed out today, we don't have a good solution for the
> dw_dmac DT binding in linux-next yet. I have posted my series
> once before and then got distracted after getting feedback from
> Viresh, Andy and Russell. I have now updated my ear
Hi Vinod,
As Andy pointed out today, we don't have a good solution for the
dw_dmac DT binding in linux-next yet. I have posted my series
once before and then got distracted after getting feedback from
Viresh, Andy and Russell. I have now updated my earlier patch
based on the feedback and rebased o
