[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140524200500.GB1023@kroah.com>
Date: Sat, 24 May 2014 13:05:00 -0700
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Emil Goode <emilgoode@...il.com>
Cc: Uwe Kleine-König
<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>,
Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@...escale.com>,
Sascha Hauer <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
Alexander Shiyan <shc_work@...l.ru>,
Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: imx: introduce function imx_free_mx3_camera
On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 05:22:00PM +0200, Emil Goode wrote:
> Hello Uwe and Greg,
>
> > You'd do a better deed if you picked up
> > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1613364/focus=1635995
>
> Since there is nothing wrong with the last version of the patch in
> the above thread, I feel strange about picking it up and just splitting
> it into two patches. However it would be good to have it applied.
>
> I think the reason why the author didn't resend is that the object file
> and data structure layout information in the changelog depend on the
> changes to both .name and .dma_mask and by splitting the patch this
> information would not apply to any one of the resulting two patches.
>
> Perhaps keeping this information in the changelog is a good reason for
> applying the patch as it is?
If you read the thread, I explained why I didn't want to take the patch
as-is. Please feel free to break it up as asked for and I'll be glad to
consider it then.
thanks,
greg k-h
--
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