Em Mon, 02 Feb 2015 16:32:07 +0100 Boris Brezillon boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com escreveu:
Hi Mauro,
On Mon, 02 Feb 2015 12:57:55 -0200 Mauro Carvalho Chehab m.chehab@samsung.com wrote:
Em Tue, 6 Jan 2015 12:43:35 +0100 Boris Brezillon boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com escreveu:
Add RGB444_1X12 and RGB565_1X16 format definitions and update the documentation.
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com Acked-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab mchehab@osg.samsung.com Acked-by: Sakari Ailus sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com
Hi Mauro, Sakari,
This patch has been rejected as 'Not Applicable'. Is there anyting wrong in it ?
I was expecting that this patch would be merged together with the remaining series, via the DRM tree. That's basically why I gave my ack: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/11/3/661
HINT: when a subsystem maintainer gives an ack, that likely means that he expects that the patch will be applied via some other tree.
My bad, I thought this would go into the media tree since this single patch is not exactly related to a DRM feature (except the fact that I was planning to use it in my DRM driver). Actually, I didn't send it to the DRM maintainer or dri-devel ML in the first place :-(. Can you reconsider taking it in the media tree ? I you can't, I'll ask Dave (just added him in Cc) to take it into the DRM tree.
I really prefer if you submit this together with the DRM series.
We don't apply API changes at media, except if the API change is needed by some driver that it is also submitted in the same series.
I don't mind applying it via media, but in this case, I'll apply together with the remaining DRM drivers, and will require DRM maintainer's ack. So, it is probably easier to just apply this change via the DRM subtree than the reverse.
Regards, Mauro