On 2017-12-08 Fri 07:51 +0000，James Hogan Wrote： > On Fri, Dec 08, 2017 at 12:01:46PM +0800, Jiaxun Yang wrote: > > Also we're going to separate code between > > Loongson2 and Loongson3 since they are becoming more and more > > identical. > > Do you mean you want to combine them?
Sorry, my fault. They're become more and more different and I'm going to separate loongson64 into loongson2 and loongson3. > > > But It will cause a lot of changes under march of loongson64 > > that currently maintaining by linux-mips community. Send plenty of > > patches to mailing list would not be a wise way to do that. So we > > can > > PR these changes to linux-next directly and PR to linux-mips before > > merge window. So we can commit by ourselves after subsystem's review to reduce linux- mips's workload. Since Huacai Chen said that we won't send PR, maybe it's unnecessary. Thanks. > For the avoidance of doubt, a pull request would not excempt you from > needing your patches properly reviewed on the mailing lists first. > > And quoting Stephen's boilerplate response to linux-next additions: > > Thanks for adding your subsystem tree as a participant of linux- > > next. As > > you may know, this is not a judgement of your code. The purpose of > > linux-next is for integration testing and to lower the impact of > > conflicts between subsystems in the next merge window. > > > > You will need to ensure that the patches/commits in your > > tree/series have > > been: > > * submitted under GPL v2 (or later) and include the > > Contributor's > > Signed-off-by, > > * posted to the relevant mailing list, > > * reviewed by you (or another maintainer of your subsystem > > tree), > > * successfully unit tested, and > > * destined for the current or next Linux merge window. > > > > Basically, this should be just what you would send to Linus (or ask > > him > > to fetch). It is allowed to be rebased if you deem it necessary. > > Cheers > James -- Jiaxun Yang
