On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 1:09 PM, Mark Brown
<[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 01:01:23PM -0800, Colin Cross wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 12:52 PM, Mark Brown
>
>> > That's the standard way of handling this sort of thing - just send the
>> > patch in a second pull request once the dependencies have all landed.
>
>> You could also put it in the tegra-arch branch and we could both re-merge it.
>
> I basically can't rebase my tree - it's merged into Takashi's tree and
> there's lots of cross dependencies with my 2.6.38 fixes branch which
> would cause bisect breakage.  If you want to cherry pick the relevant
> WM8903 commit over into your tree that'd also be OK by me.
>

We should be fine with two pull requests.  I would still like to get
all the changes into the for-next branch, without the wm8903 header
change, but with the harmony file that depends on it.  I will point
the for-linus branch at the last change that compiles without the
wm8903 header change. linux-next should get the ASoC tree and the
Tegra for-next tree, so everything should compile there.

I'm going to be out of the office next week, so this is probably the
last chance to get features in 2.6.39.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to