On Wed, 2 Jun 2010 20:19:01 -0300 Marcelo Roberto Jimenez <mrobe...@cetuc.puc-rio.br> wrote:
> The following is a compilation of all the patches I have done for the > nanoengine. Some of these are also valid for SA11xx based machines > like, e.g, sharp Zaurus. Which other kernel developer were you hoping would merge this tree? > arch/arm/configs/nanoengine_defconfig | 1396 > ++++++++++++++++++++++++ > arch/arm/mach-sa1100/Kconfig | 8 + > arch/arm/mach-sa1100/Makefile | 2 + > arch/arm/mach-sa1100/cpu-sa1100.c | 56 +- > arch/arm/mach-sa1100/cpu-sa1110.c | 51 +- > arch/arm/mach-sa1100/include/mach/nanoengine.h | 30 + > arch/arm/mach-sa1100/nanoengine.c | 115 ++ > drivers/pcmcia/Makefile | 3 +- > drivers/pcmcia/sa1100_generic.c | 3 + > drivers/pcmcia/sa1100_generic.h | 1 + > drivers/pcmcia/sa1100_nanoengine.c | 219 ++++ > drivers/pcmcia/soc_common.c | 129 ++- > drivers/rtc/rtc-sa1100.c | 153 ++- I can only think it must have been Russell. I've rather lost track of what's happening with ARM subtrees. I _think_ it's now the case the relevant maintainers are putting their trees into linux-next directly and are asking Linus to pull them directly. But maybe that's a misconception. Can someone please explain the current state of play? Thanks. _______________________________________________ Linux PCMCIA reimplementation list http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pcmcia
