[PATCH 00/38] MMC updates, plus CuBox-i WiFi support

Ulf Hansson ulf.hansson at linaro.org
Fri Apr 25 21:40:03 EST 2014

On 25 April 2014 13:20, Russell King - ARM Linux <linux at arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 01:18:28PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>> On 25 April 2014 11:03, Russell King - ARM Linux <linux at arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>> > On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 01:13:05PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>> >> On 24 April 2014 12:57, Russell King - ARM Linux <linux at arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>> >> > This is nothing new or unexpected - it was last posted back in February,
>> >> > and I elected that it should be held off until after the last merge
>> >> > window.
>> >> >
>> >> > Unfortunately, I didn't have time to post it immediately after the merge
>> >> > window closed, partly because it needed to be rebased on top of tglx's
>> >> > IRQ changes on which it depends.  I was carrying those as separate commits
>> >> > to the ones Thomas was carrying in his tree - and in the event, Thomas had
>> >> > modified his patches slightly between sending me copies of them and the
>> >> > versions he sent during the merge window.
>> >>
>> >> Okay, so let's keep up the frequency here then. I only had some minor
>> >> comments, please fix them and send a v2.
>> >
>> > Right, so I've updated the patches, and added one ack to one patch.
>> > That seems insufficient to me - the only platform these have been
>> > tested on is iMX6, which is sdhci-esdhc-imx.c.
>> >
>> > They _really_ need testing elsewhere too.  Or is the plan to merge
>> > them and then see about getting people to test them and fix them up
>> > afterwards?
>> I was hoping people could start doing tests, before Chris actually
>> decided to pull them in. Now, if that doesn't happen, we could just
>> merge them, as you say, and thus we have to fix potential problems
>> afterwards. I would expect you to help out if problem occurs.
>> If we decide to not merge in a while, I am not sure how long we could
>> prevent other sdhci patches from being merged. I guess Chris will have
>> to take the final call.
> Or we just drop them for yet another cycle and show how mainline kernel
> development sucks, why getting stuff into mainline is utterly painful,
> and why using vendor kernels is /soo/ much better than this crap.

Dropping them is too me a bad option and I really don't think that
should be needed.

I would like to encourage people to help out with testing and I
suppose we have to give this at least some time.

Anyway, post your new version. I will create the pull request based on that.

> --
> FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: now at 9.7Mbps down 460kbps up... slowly
> improving, and getting towards what was expected from it.

More information about the Linuxppc-dev mailing list