[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120904092020.GA21271@pengutronix.de>
Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2012 11:20:20 +0200
From: Wolfram Sang <w.sang@...gutronix.de>
To: Roland Stigge <stigge@...com.de>
Cc: Kevin Wells <kevin.wells@....com>,
"vitalywool@...il.com" <vitalywool@...il.com>,
"khali@...ux-fr.org" <khali@...ux-fr.org>,
"ben-linux@...ff.org" <ben-linux@...ff.org>,
"grant.likely@...retlab.ca" <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
"linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org" <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Srinivas Bakki <srinivas.bakki@....com>,
"aletes.xgr@...il.com" <aletes.xgr@...il.com>,
"jonsmirl@...il.com" <jonsmirl@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND 1/2] i2c: pnx: Fix bit definitions
On Mon, Sep 03, 2012 at 10:16:22PM +0200, Roland Stigge wrote:
> Hi Wolfram,
>
> On 20/08/12 19:55, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> >> I've never had my hands on a PNX4008 chip at NXP, but I do
> >> believe they are the same IP. That specific I2C IP was used in a
> >> number of NXP/Phillips chips besides the PNX4008/LPC32xx. I don't
> >> think there are any PNX4008's in the wild, and even working in
> >> NXP, I can't find any non-marketing reference material for that
> >> part (including the user manual).
> >
> > Thanks for the heads up. I'll apply both patches, then.
>
> Should I consider the two patches as applied now (where?
> i2c-embedded?), or should I resend? ;-)
I will apply them these days and then let them stay in linux-next for a
few days. So, I'd think they should go in for rc6.
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Wolfram Sang |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (199 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists