Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 16 Sep 2009 10:09:55 +0300 | From | Artem Bityutskiy <> | Subject | Re: 2.6.32 -mm merge plans |
| |
On 09/16/2009 03:03 AM, Paul Mundt wrote: > On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 04:15:35PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: >> mtd-make-onenand-genericc-more-generic.patch >> mtd-nand-add-page-parameter-to-all-read_page-read_page_raw-apis.patch >> mtd-nand-add-new-ecc-mode-ecc_hw_oob_first.patch >> mtd-nand-davinci-add-4-bit-ecc-support-for-large-page-nand-chips.patch >> mtd-nand-davinci-add-4-bit-ecc-support-for-large-page-nand-chips-update.patch >> mtd-jffs2-fix-read-buffer-overflow.patch >> mtd-prevent-a-read-from-eraseregions.patch >> mtd-prevent-a-read-from-regions.patch >> mtd-jedec_probe-fix-nec-upd29f064115-detection.patch >> mtdpart-memory-accessor-interface-for-mtd-layer.patch >> >> -> dwmw2 >> > Regarding mtd-make-onenand-genericc-more-generic.patch, I'm not really > sure what happened. To recap: > > It was posted to the mtd list here: > > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2009-August/026805.html > > Kyungmin objected to the driver name change here: > > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2009-August/026807.html > > I pointed out that the rough rationale for the name change here: > > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2009-August/026808.html > > and offered to redo the patch keeping the old name if Kyungmin felt the > rationale wasn't valid, but received no reply. Subsequently, Artem > mentioned that he had merged it in to his l2-mtd-2.6.git tree here: > > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2009-August/026866.html > > which subsequently seems to not actually have happened.
Well, I did put my patch to my l2-mtd-2.6.git tree:
http://git.infradead.org/users/dedekind/l2-mtd-2.6.git/commit/6e6e7d0e163148c620b4807b1ffac973f9805f20
I just put it to the dunno branch which means "I did not review this". The master branch contains the stuff I did review.
And the idea was that dwmw2 would then take a look at all these patches and merge them. He did merge the stuff from the master branch, but did not merge the stuff from the dunno branch (yet).
> This is a pretty trivial patch, and I don't mind respinning it in > whatever form folks are content with. I had assumed given the mention > that it had been merged in to the l2 tree that the rationale was > sufficient for merging.
I know it is frustrating when maintainers ignore patches, we feel this pain with ARM patches, for example. It is unpleasant to re-send patches 4 times, and get zero response, not even "I have not time now" one. On the other hand, I understand maintainers who are busy with other things.
So I just try to help by collecting people's stuff, review _some_ of it, but I do not merge this upstream.
-- Best Regards, Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |