Subject: Re: Request for linux-next inclusion of the voyager tree

From: Stephen Rothwell <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 11:35:43 +1000

On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 18:53:31 +0200 Ingo Molnar <[email-masked]> wrote:
>
> * James Bottomley <[email-masked]> wrote:
> > 
> > OK, so this is an acceptable compromise for me too.
> > 
> > What I think now is needed (from me) are three patch sets:
> > 
> > 1. The final subarchitecture cleanups
> > 2. The quirk model/smp ops additions
> > 3. The voyager put back.
> 
> Yes, that looks fine.
> 
> You can have them in a single series for convenience if you want to 
> (it's probably easier for you to test that way) - but 3 separate 
> series are fine too, no strong preference either way - as long as 
> the internal structure and details follows the ordering and 
> parameters we outlined in previous mails.

OK, given this looks like a rewrite of the voyager tree, I will drop it
from linux-next for a while.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    [email-masked]
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/