Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 10 Mar 2013 09:45:30 -0700 | From | Greg Kroah-Hartman <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 30/31] driver/base: implement subsys_virtual_register() |
| |
On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 04:57:02AM -0700, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hey, guys. > > On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 01:04:25AM +0100, Kay Sievers wrote: > > > Sorry for the delay, I'm at a conference all this week, and haven't had > > > much time to think about this. > > > > > > If Kay says this is ok for now, that's good enough for me. > > > > Yes, it looks fine to me. If we provide the unified handling of > > classes and buses some day, this can probably go away, but until that > > it looks fine and is straight forward to do it that way, > > How should this be routed? I can take it but Kay needs it too so > workqueue tree probably isn't the best fit although I can set up a > separate branch if needed.
What patch set does Kay need it for? I have no objection for you to take it through the workqueue tree:
Acked-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
| |