Op 23 sep 2008, om 11:24 heeft Tony Lindgren het volgende geschreven:

* Koen Kooi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [080923 11:41]:

Op 23 sep 2008, om 10:19 heeft Tomi Valkeinen het volgende geschreven:
On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 18:10 +0300, ext Tony Lindgren wrote:
* Tomi Valkeinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [080922 17:49]:

I sent a preview of a new display subsystem for OMAP2/3 some time
ago:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-omap&m=122114505030542&w=2

I now have updated it, the patches are at the same place:
http://www.bat.org/~tomba/omap-dss/

This discussion should go to linux-fbdev-devel list. Please keep l-o list Cc'd though. Also you should post the patches as a proper inline
series, please see git-send-email man page.


Ok, I'll move it to linux-fbdev-devel.

I didn't post the patches inline, as they are quite big (250k+). I
thought there was a "rule" to put big patches to some public place,
not
to mail them.

What is the proper procedure for this work? Discuss and review the
patches on fbdevel, and mail to l-o when finalized? Or go directly to
Linus' tree?

Or a branch on l-o (like pm-0)  that will get rebased when things
change.

I'd suggest discussing it on fbdevel list, and then have the necessary
patches included into the mainline kernel via fbdevel. If you cc l-o
list, people will have a chance to comment also.

This patch also hooks into boardcode for omap3 boards, which AFAIK aren't in mainline yet, which makes it hard to funnel a working patch through the fbdev tree to mainline. But apart from that, going through fbdev-devel first would cut down on tedious review rounds later on. Does davinci share enough bits to make this DSS lib work for that as well?

regards,

Koen

Attachment: PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply via email to