[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACRpkdayTNQNUDw_eZ9brDBAbd-iSLumJrQrrVnABt=C92kUOA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2014 11:19:40 +0200
From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc: Pramod Gurav <pramod.gurav@...rtplayin.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>,
Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>,
"linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] mfd: remove use of gpiochip_remove() retval
On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 11:14 AM, Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Oct 2014, Linus Walleij wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 4:15 PM, Pramod Gurav
>> <pramod.gurav@...rtplayin.com> wrote:
>>
>> > Get rid of using return value from gpiochip_remove() as it returns
>> > void.
>> >
>> > Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
>> > Cc: Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>
>> > Cc: Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>
>> > CC: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
>> > Cc: linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Pramod Gurav <pramod.gurav@...rtplayin.com>
>>
>> Already fixed in the GPIO tree.
>
> What does that mean? That it doesn't need fixing here?
No. I think you already ACKed the patch fixing it in the GPIO
tree...
There has been some misunderstanding and duplicate patches
fixing already fixed problems are flying around.
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