[lkml]   [2015]   [Jul]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/2 RESEND] power: reset: Add syscon reboot/poweroff device nodes for APM X-Gene platform
Hi Olof,

On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 11:20 AM, Olof Johansson <> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 11:10 AM, Loc Ho <> wrote:
>> Hi Olof,,
>>>>>> This patch set adds syscon reboot/poweroff device nodes to support reboot and
>>>>>> poweroff features on X-Gene platform.
>>>>>> Tai Nguyen (2):
>>>>>> power: reset: Add syscon reboot device node for APM X-Gene platform
>>>>>> power: reset: Add syscon poweroff device node for APM X-Gene Mustang platform
>>>>>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/apm/apm-mustang.dts | 12 ++++++++++++
>>>>>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/apm/apm-storm.dtsi | 12 ++++++++++++
>>>>>> 2 files changed, 24 insertions(+)
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> It's unclear to me what you want to happen to these patches. They are
>>>>> sent to a long list of to-recipients, one of which is In
>>>>> general, specify the person you want to take action on the patch in to
>>>>> with the rest on cc.
>>>> Is there an owner for all DT node files? Is that Catalina as he is
>>>> owner for ARM64 arch folder?
>>> The ARM64 DT changes get merged through arm-soc, i.e. they get sent to
>>> by the platform maintainers and picked up by us from
>>> there (Arnd, Kevin or myself).
>>>>> We generally ask that patches first go to the subarch maintainers,
>>>>> and they in turn send it on to us (either through a pull request or
>>>>> by sending the patches to be applied). In the case of X-Gene, there is
>>>>> no general platform maintainer so we keep getting patches from various
>>>>> engineers at APM and it's unclear to us what your intentions are.
>>>>> I'd prefer to see one (to start with) person in charge of these (i.e. one
>>>>> maintainer from the APM side). Please add that person to the MAINTAINERS
>>>>> file as well.
>>>> Are you suggesting that we have one person to start an GIT with
>>>> to keep all these misc ack'ed patches for X-Gene (APM) that
>>>> don't seems to have an maintainer/home. Then request an pull by you?
>>> Pull requests are convenient for us, but if it's just a patch or two,
>>> sending them directly in email is fine as well.
>> If there is an chance in pulling this power off/reset patches for
>> 4.2-rc4, can you pull in as patches? Otherwise, we will go the GIT
>> pull request.
> We can definitely pick them up and queue them for 4.3 (see below). We
> normally want the bulk of patches before -rc4/5, but we take smaller
> updates closer to the merge window as well.
>>> What I want to avoid is a large number of people sending us patches
>>> directly, which is why we ask for platform maintainers to coordinate
>>> and aggregate patches to send on to us. That way we have one person
>>> down the chain that we knows how we want the code delivered, and that
>>> can do a round of reviews before we get it.
>> We will get an GIT setup up for this and Duc Dang will contact you for
>> pull request when ready.

We are debating whether we should setup a company server (where we can
have full control about storage, user permissions, backup, ...) or
just use to host our X-Gene kernel tree.

Github seems already provide everything we need for a public source
tree. Per your experience, what is your (and probably other
maintainers) reference in git hosting server? Is there any
inconvenience or difficulty for the maintainers to pull/merge code
from Github versus from a company server?

> Ok, sounds good. If you have people in the bay area that need PGP keys
> signed for this, I'd be happy to help.
> As far as the current DT patches, there's been several sent by
> different people. Please aggregate them into one patch series and send
> that (as git send-email is fine) to us to queue for 4.3.
> Thanks!
> -Olof

Duc Dang.

 \ /
  Last update: 2015-07-25 21:01    [W:0.082 / U:1.016 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site