Hi Jim,
Please review and help merge the attached patch for NXP. The patch is re-based on top of sig-altarch7-aarch64 branch.
Thanks, Lijun
On 06/22/2016 06:54 PM, Lijun Pan wrote:
Hi Jim,
Please review and help merge the attached patch for NXP. The patch is re-based on top of sig-altarch7-aarch64 branch.
Certainly, though it will probably be monday before I have a chance to review it. I'm traveling back from the OPNFV summit today.
My initial question would be: Have these updates been accepted/merged in the upstream/mainline kernel, and if so can you point me to an acceptance ack for them?
On 06/23/2016 12:00 AM, Jim Perrin wrote:
On 06/22/2016 06:54 PM, Lijun Pan wrote:
Hi Jim,
Please review and help merge the attached patch for NXP. The patch is re-based on top of sig-altarch7-aarch64 branch.
Certainly, though it will probably be monday before I have a chance to review it. I'm traveling back from the OPNFV summit today.
My initial question would be: Have these updates been accepted/merged in the upstream/mainline kernel, and if so can you point me to an acceptance ack for them?
Yes, they are already accepted by mainline kernel. I cherry-picked them from mainline kernel. You can find the reference for each sub-patch say, +Subject: [PATCH 01/27] net: phy: add driver for aquantia phy + +This patch added driver to support Aquantia PHYs AQ1202, AQ2104, AQR105, +AQR405, which accessed through clause 45. + +Signed-off-by: Shaohui Xie Shaohui.Xie@freescale.commailto:Shaohui.Xie@freescale.com +Signed-off-by: David S. Miller davem@davemloft.netmailto:davem@davemloft.net +(cherry picked from commit bee8259dd31f419a883174556b11edc6f9a153d1)
Lijun
On 06/23/2016 11:06 AM, Lijun Pan wrote:
On 06/23/2016 12:00 AM, Jim Perrin wrote:
On 06/22/2016 06:54 PM, Lijun Pan wrote:
Hi Jim,
Please review and help merge the attached patch for NXP. The patch is re-based on top of sig-altarch7-aarch64 branch.
Certainly, though it will probably be monday before I have a chance to review it. I'm traveling back from the OPNFV summit today.
My initial question would be: Have these updates been accepted/merged in the upstream/mainline kernel, and if so can you point me to an acceptance ack for them?
Yes, they are already accepted by mainline kernel. I cherry-picked them from mainline kernel.
Right, but some of these appear to not be upstream yet. the 8th and 9th patches included in this rollup don't seem to be in linux-next or the torvalds-linux tree that I can see. #8 has questionable logic around the config that may not be correct. #9 is complicated enough that I'm having trouble following it, so without a reference to that one being upstream I'm leaning toward pulling it out.
On 06/27/2016 01:12 PM, Jim Perrin wrote:
On 06/23/2016 11:06 AM, Lijun Pan wrote:
On 06/23/2016 12:00 AM, Jim Perrin wrote:
On 06/22/2016 06:54 PM, Lijun Pan wrote:
Hi Jim,
Please review and help merge the attached patch for NXP. The patch is re-based on top of sig-altarch7-aarch64 branch.
Certainly, though it will probably be monday before I have a chance to review it. I'm traveling back from the OPNFV summit today.
My initial question would be: Have these updates been accepted/merged in the upstream/mainline kernel, and if so can you point me to an acceptance ack for them?
Yes, they are already accepted by mainline kernel. I cherry-picked them from mainline kernel.
Right, but some of these appear to not be upstream yet. the 8th and 9th patches included in this rollup don't seem to be in linux-next or the torvalds-linux tree that I can see. #8 has questionable logic around the config that may not be correct. #9 is complicated enough that I'm having trouble following it, so without a reference to that one being upstream I'm leaning toward pulling it out.
Hi Jim,
I have reworded #8 in a more understandable way. #8 is necessary for all the FSL_IFC related configuration on ARM64. #8 only affects FSL_IFC, not affecting other vendor's drivers. That being said, #8 is harmless. I have taken #9 out. I have attached version 2 of the patch.
Thanks, Lijun
On 06/27/2016 05:49 PM, Lijun Pan wrote:
I have reworded #8 in a more understandable way. #8 is necessary for all the FSL_IFC related configuration on ARM64. #8 only affects FSL_IFC, not affecting other vendor's drivers. That being said, #8 is harmless. I have taken #9 out. I have attached version 2 of the patch.
Looks good. Merged and built as the .29 kernel. This should show up as an update soon.
Hi Jim,
I see my patch being merged today. But the author was changed. Also I find the previous usb related patch is under your name. I request you change the author back to Me (Lijun Pan) as a respect of my work.
Thanks,
_/ _/_/_/_/_/ _/ Lijun Pan _/ _/ _/ 347-828-1413 _/_/_/_/_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/_/ _/ _/ _/_/_/_/ _/_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/_/_/_/ _/ _/ _/_/_/_/ _/ _/_/ _/ _/_/_/_/_/ _/ _/_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/_/
On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 10:00 PM, Jim Perrin jperrin@centos.org wrote:
On 06/27/2016 05:49 PM, Lijun Pan wrote:
I have reworded #8 in a more understandable way. #8 is necessary for all the FSL_IFC related configuration on ARM64. #8 only affects FSL_IFC, not affecting other vendor's drivers. That being said, #8 is harmless. I have taken #9 out. I have attached version 2 of the patch.
Looks good. Merged and built as the .29 kernel. This should show up as an update soon.
-- Jim Perrin The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77 _______________________________________________ Arm-dev mailing list Arm-dev@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/arm-dev
-
Jim Perrin -
Lijun Pan -
Lijun Pan