[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACRpkdY-4+CJpCwGsbpb7mo0zRevEmpmoyirxeB9FbU0sS=GsQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2013 19:20:19 +0200
From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To: Sherman Yin <syin@...adcom.com>
Cc: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
"linux-next@...r.kernel.org" <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...ricsson.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the pinctrl tree with Linus' tree
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 5:24 PM, Sherman Yin <syin@...adcom.com> wrote:
> Hmm, I fixed this the first time I ported over to LinusW's devel tree,
> but when I rebased on Sunday, the spin lock commit seemed to be
> reverted or gone.
My pinctrl devel branch was branched off of v3.11-rc1, and the
spinlock changes were in some later -rc and I didn't merge
them in until now, because I thought they were orthogonal.
How wrong I was. So merged in -rc7 now and pushed, please
check the end result or linux-next.
> Note the following return in between the locking and unlocking -
> need an unlock there?
>
>> + case PIN_CONFIG_DRIVE_STRENGTH:
>> + strength = pinconf_to_config_argument(configs[i]);
>> + if (strength > 40)
>> + return -EINVAL;
Argh. Send a patch with your reported-by tag...
Yours,
Linus Walleij
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists