[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6612075.PRZcWcuj98@vostro.rjw.lan>
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 12:18:51 +0200
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc: Stratos Karafotis <stratosk@...aphore.gr>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 5/8] mfd: db8500-prcmu: Use cpufreq_for_each_entry macro for iteration
On Tuesday, April 22, 2014 08:15:41 AM Lee Jones wrote:
> > The cpufreq core now supports the cpufreq_for_each_entry macro helper
> > for iteration over the cpufreq_frequency_table, so use it.
> >
> > It should have no functional changes.
>
> > Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis <stratosk@...aphore.gr>
> > ---
>
> It would be good to have a changelog which describes the differences
> between the versions, so we can keep track.
>
> > drivers/mfd/db8500-prcmu.c | 19 ++++++++-----------
> > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> So it looks like I already applied v2 of this patch to my tree. What
> changed in v3 and v4? Should I remove that patch from MFD and apply
> this one instead?
The reason why v4 was sent is because I asked for it.
And if you applied [5/8] without [1/8], it won't work, because the macro is
introduced by that patch.
If that's the case, please drop [5/8] and let me handle the entire series.
Kind regards,
Rafael
--
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