[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACRpkdZ4f9XPZ6kF2QV4TNaX4KPmzDBYBGo+pXgKw06EzbEtkA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 23:54:43 +0200
From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To: Crestez Dan Leonard <leonard.crestez@...el.com>
Cc: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
"linux-iio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-iio@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@....de>,
Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@...erw.net>,
Daniel Baluta <daniel.baluta@...el.com>,
Giuseppe Barba <giuseppe.barba@...com>,
Denis Ciocca <denis.ciocca@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] iio: st_sensors: Init trigger before irq request
On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 2:33 PM, Crestez Dan Leonard
<leonard.crestez@...el.com> wrote:
> [Me]
>> However I think my patch fixing the thread issue will collide
>> by being close in context to this so it'd be great if you
>> could resend it on top of
>> "iio: st_sensors: switch to a threaded interrupt"?
>
> I checked my local git tree and this was already on top of v6 of that
> patch.
OK no problem then.
> I think this issue is much less likely to cause problems without
> it.
Yeah.
> Perhaps it should be incorporated into your patch?
No better keep them separate.
Yours,
Linus Walleij
Powered by blists - more mailing lists