On 05/20/13 14:29, Viresh Kumar wrote:
[...]
Rafael, if you don't mind, let me take this into Samsung tree for v3.11.
Sure, please go ahead.
Kukjin,
I hope you have already applied this for linux-next?
Yeah, already done in my local and you can see it in my public tree in a
couple of ho
On 14 May 2013 18:30, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Tuesday, May 14, 2013 09:36:42 PM Kukjin Kim wrote:
>> Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> >
>> > On 13 May 2013 16:21, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> > > That doesn't matter I suppose. I can take it, but please rebase it on
>> > top
>> > > of current linux-ne
On Tuesday, May 14, 2013 09:36:42 PM Kukjin Kim wrote:
> Viresh Kumar wrote:
> >
> > On 13 May 2013 16:21, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > That doesn't matter I suppose. I can take it, but please rebase it on
> > top
> > > of current linux-next.
> >
> > I have already done that (attached). But i
Viresh Kumar wrote:
>
> On 13 May 2013 16:21, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > That doesn't matter I suppose. I can take it, but please rebase it on
> top
> > of current linux-next.
>
> I have already done that (attached). But i wasn't sure what Kukjin wants
> as
> he may report conflicts again and
On 13 May 2013 16:21, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> That doesn't matter I suppose. I can take it, but please rebase it on top
> of current linux-next.
I have already done that (attached). But i wasn't sure what Kukjin wants as
he may report conflicts again and i will ask the same question for 3.12
On Monday, May 13, 2013 11:35:22 AM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 23 April 2013 20:55, Kukjin Kim wrote:
> > On 04/05/13 20:36, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >>
> >> On Friday, April 05, 2013 12:36:34 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 5 April 2013 12:18, Kukjin Kim wrote:
>
> Basically, thi
On 23 April 2013 20:55, Kukjin Kim wrote:
> On 04/05/13 20:36, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>
>> On Friday, April 05, 2013 12:36:34 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
>>>
>>> On 5 April 2013 12:18, Kukjin Kim wrote:
Basically, this moving looks good to me, but should be re-worked based
on
fo
On Friday, April 26, 2013 01:48:19 AM Kukjin Kim wrote:
> On 04/24/13 07:59, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> >> Rafael, please take this patch with my ack in your tree, sorry for noise.
> >>
> >> Acked-by: Kukjin Kim
> >>
> >> If any problems, please kindly let me know.
> >
> > Well, I sup
On 04/24/13 07:59, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
[...]
Rafael, please take this patch with my ack in your tree, sorry for noise.
Acked-by: Kukjin Kim
If any problems, please kindly let me know.
Well, I suppose I can take the original patch, but then it will conflict with
your tree during merge.
On Wednesday, April 24, 2013 12:25:59 AM Kukjin Kim wrote:
> On 04/05/13 20:36, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Friday, April 05, 2013 12:36:34 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> >> On 5 April 2013 12:18, Kukjin Kim wrote:
> >>> Basically, this moving looks good to me, but should be re-worked based on
> >>>
On 04/05/13 20:36, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Friday, April 05, 2013 12:36:34 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
On 5 April 2013 12:18, Kukjin Kim wrote:
Basically, this moving looks good to me, but should be re-worked based on
for-next of samsung tree because this touches too many samsung stuff so this
Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
[...]
> > >
> > > Well, I'm dropping it. Please merge via the Samsung tree.
> > >
> > OK, I will.
> >
> > I got patch file from Viresh, and there is a sign from Rafael,
> > but it should be ack. So Rafael, let me use your ack on this patch when
> > I apply. If any proble
On Monday, April 08, 2013 06:15:09 PM Kukjin Kim wrote:
> Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> >
> > On Friday, April 05, 2013 12:36:34 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > > On 5 April 2013 12:18, Kukjin Kim wrote:
> > > > Basically, this moving looks good to me, but should be re-worked based
> > on
> > > > for-nex
On 8 April 2013 14:45, Kukjin Kim wrote:
> Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>> Well, I'm dropping it. Please merge via the Samsung tree.
>>
> OK, I will.
>
> I got patch file from Viresh, and there is a sign from Rafael, but it should
> be ack. So Rafael, let me use your ack on this patch when I apply.
Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> On Friday, April 05, 2013 12:36:34 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > On 5 April 2013 12:18, Kukjin Kim wrote:
> > > Basically, this moving looks good to me, but should be re-worked based
> on
> > > for-next of samsung tree because this touches too many samsung stuff
> so thi
On 5 April 2013 12:36, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 5 April 2013 12:18, Kukjin Kim wrote:
>> Basically, this moving looks good to me, but should be re-worked based on
>> for-next of samsung tree because this touches too many samsung stuff so this
>> should be sent to upstream via samsung tree.
>
> Hm
On Friday, April 05, 2013 12:36:34 PM Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 5 April 2013 12:18, Kukjin Kim wrote:
> > Basically, this moving looks good to me, but should be re-worked based on
> > for-next of samsung tree because this touches too many samsung stuff so this
> > should be sent to upstream via sam
On 5 April 2013 12:18, Kukjin Kim wrote:
> Basically, this moving looks good to me, but should be re-worked based on
> for-next of samsung tree because this touches too many samsung stuff so this
> should be sent to upstream via samsung tree.
Hmm... Its already applied in Rafael's tree. But it do
Viresh Kumar wrote:
>
> This patch moves cpufreq driver of Samsung's ARM based s3c24xx platform to
> drivers/cpufreq.
>
> Cc: Ben Dooks
> Cc: Kukjin Kim
> Cc: linux-samsung-...@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org
> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar
> Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann
>
19 matches
Mail list logo
