Re: [PATCH v9 00/10] mux controller abstraction and iio/i2c muxes

From	Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>
Newsgroups	linux.kernel
Subject	Re: [PATCH v9 00/10] mux controller abstraction and iio/i2c muxes
Date	2017-03-03 18:10 +0100
Message-ID	<tgYSl-4fZ-7@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	<tbgIk-5XZ-67@gated-at.bofh.it> <tfTBo-7wT-23@gated-at.bofh.it> <tfTBo-7wT-21@gated-at.bofh.it> <tgYSl-4fZ-9@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw

> Jonathan, Wolfram, do you have any preferences on how this should be
> coordinated regarding the new iio and i2c drivers (and iio changes)?

You got the acks, all is fine, I think.

> My plan is to at some point declare the branch immutable. Then both of
> you can pull it in. Or? 

Yup, sounds good.

> But now that I think about it I wonder what the point is of having
> Greg pull it in also? Sure, third time's a charm and all that, but...

AFAIU, Greg will be your "upstream", so he should definately pull the
branch. I will just pull it in to avoid merge conflicts in my tree.
Or did I misunderstand your question?

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: [PATCH v9 00/10] mux controller abstraction and iio/i2c muxes Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de> - 2017-03-03 18:10 +0100
  Re: [PATCH v9 00/10] mux controller abstraction and iio/i2c muxes Jonathan Cameron <jic23@jic23.retrosnub.co.uk> - 2017-03-03 18:50 +0100
  Re: [PATCH v9 00/10] mux controller abstraction and iio/i2c muxes Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de> - 2017-03-03 20:40 +0100

csiph-web