We now have ux500-core in the linux-next tree, this means that this is where we need to stack up any core changes for Ux500, i.e. files that *only* touch code inside arch/arm/mach-ux500/* or arch/arm/plat-nomadik/*

Any generic ARM patches, MMCI or PL011 UART patches still have to go into Russells patch tracker.

These patches should be discarded from the patch tracker ASAP: 6374/1 ux500: mop500: add TC35892 and MicroSD slot support 6397/1 ux500: rework device registration Rabin can you fix this?

Any other subsystem needs to go to respective subsystem maintainer, pure platform data patches without *any* dependencies to other subsystems can be merged through my tree.

Right now I have some stuff from Mattias Wallin pending and hoping for more to make the delta between our internal tree and mainline as small as possible.

Thanks to all of you who have been kicking me about this, Rabin especially, I finally fixed it up...

Linus Walleij

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au Date: 2010/11/30 Subject: Re: Please include ux500 core into linux-next To: Linus Walleij linus.walleij@linaro.org Kopia: Russell King rmk@arm.linux.org.uk, linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linaro-dev linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org, Rabin VINCENT rabin.vincent@stericsson.com

Hi Linus,

On Tue, 30 Nov 2010 10:31:43 +0100 Linus Walleij linus.walleij@linaro.org wrote:

please consider to start merging our ux500-core branch into linux-next:

git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/linusw/linux-stericsson.git Branch: ux500-core

(NB: there is a "next" branch, which include patches to multiple subsystems, don't merge that, this is just the ux500 core.)

OK.

I rebase this regularly to Torvalds' -rc tags, hope that's OK.

Yeah, that's OK.  Rebasing to tags is better than random points, but less rebasing is even better.

All code is being reviewed on the linux-arm-kernel list, and the patches here are intended for pull request to Russell King who in turn take them upstream. I hope this procedure is acceptable.

This is all fine.  Russell, I am assuming that this is all OK with you.

We currently have some of these patches in Russells patch tracker as well, but they will be taken out in favor of the pull approach once this branch lands in -next.

I have added that branch from today with just you (Linus) as the contact.  If you want additional contacts (people who will be notified of merge and build problems), please let me know.

Thanks for adding your subsystem tree as a participant of linux-next.  As you may know, this is not a judgment 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, Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au

Legal Stuff: By participating in linux-next, your subsystem tree contributions are public and will be included in the linux-next trees.  You may be sent e-mail messages indicating errors or other issues when the patches/commits from your subsystem tree are merged and tested in linux-next.  These messages may also be cross-posted to the linux-next mailing list, the linux-kernel mailing list, etc.  The linux-next tree project and IBM (my employer) make no warranties regarding the linux-next project, the testing procedures, the results, the e-mails, etc.  If you don't agree to these ground rules, let me know and I'll remove your tree from participation in linux-next.