Re: [PATCH 03/29] gma500: Ensure the frame buffer has a linearvirtual mapping

[Jiri Kosina]

On Wed, 29 Jun 2011, Jiri Kosina wrote:

> > Can you drop the bits you have merged and I'll send you a new set (which
> > will instead break the stuff Jiri has in his tree and he can fix it up)
[ ... snip ... ]
> I will drop the staging bits, sorry again for missing those in the bulk.

Or just let me know whatever you prefer (both now and in the longer 
term as well).

I can either drop the gma500 bits I have queued now (and stop applying 
anything touching it, hard rule), or you rebasing on top of Greg's staging 
tree instead of linux-next (and I sorting out the merge conflict later).

> I am still wondering how come that this is causing trouble to anyone 
> though -- is anyone really developing real code on top of linux-next 
> (which should be there to cross-check merge problems between subsystems 
> and test functionality) instead of particular subsystem tree?

-- 
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/