linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC/RFT 1/2] regulator: Fix da9052 ldo regulator names

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20120315104930.GE3138@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Date:	Thu, 15 Mar 2012 10:49:31 +0000
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To:	Axel Lin <axel.lin@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, David Dajun Chen <dchen@...semi.com>,
	Ashish Jangam <ashish.jangam@...tcummins.com>,
	"Ying-Chun Liu (PaulLiu)" <paul.liu@...aro.org>,
	Liam Girdwood <lrg@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC/RFT 1/2] regulator: Fix da9052 ldo regulator names

On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 07:42:53AM +0800, Axel Lin wrote:

> commit 4adf9beda5 regulator: Fix mask parameter in da9052_reg_update calls
> commit 7b95765 regulator: Set n_voltages for da9052 regulators
> commit 93651218 regulator: da9052: Ensure the selected voltage falls
> within the specified range

> I'm not sure if I should re-generate these 2 patches against
> topic/drivers branch because
> you will have conflict when merge them to for-next branch then.

Those are bug fixes which are going to Linus, I guess I can merge them
over though as there's a direct conflict.  Can you please resend the
patches as they were, I deleted them when they didn't apply?

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)