Messages in this thread | | | From | Kumar Gala <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] fsldma: use PCI Read Multiple command | Date | Fri, 12 Jun 2009 10:03:27 -0500 |
| |
On Jun 12, 2009, at 4:23 AM, Li Yang wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 11:17 PM, Ira Snyder<iws@ovro.caltech.edu> > wrote: >> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 09:45:26PM -0500, Kumar Gala wrote: >>> >>> On Apr 27, 2009, at 3:49 PM, Dan Williams wrote: >>> >>>> On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Timur Tabi <timur@freescale.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>> Adding Kumar to the CC: list, since he might pick up the patch. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Acked-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com> >>>> >>>> I agree with taking this through Kumar's tree. >>> >>> I'm going through patches for .31.. Should I still pick this up? >>> Going >>> forward should I pick up fsldma patches? >>> >> >> I'm fine with that, but you should probably talk to Li Yang (added to >> CC). He's gotten in contact with me a few times recently. > > I am fine with both ways for this patch as it is only related to > Freescale register details. But in general I think patches should go > through functional subsystem, as they usually would need insight of > the subsystem architecture. I prefer the way that the patch acked or > signed-off by Freescale guys and push upstream through Dan's tree as > most other subsystems did. Unless Dan prefers to ack the subsystem > architectural part of each patch and have them pushed other way.
I agree w/this and just wanting to see what Dan's preference is.
- k
| |