[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACRpkdYZPcjGuRKVL6qwof1p7ZXT4EvwzAuz59oTgp9Z5Dzixw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 00:09:32 +0200
From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To: Andrew Jeffery <andrew@...id.au>
Cc: Joel Stanley <joel@....id.au>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
"linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
openbmc@...ts.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/8] pinctrl: aspeed-g4: Capture SuperIO pinmux dependency
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 2:33 AM, Andrew Jeffery <andrew@...id.au> wrote:
>> Patch applied for v4.10.
>> (Tell me if I'm applying patches in wrong order or something, and
>> I hope this doesn't clash with the fixes.)
>
> Both this patch and 8/8 functionally depend on 5/8. I fetched the
> pinctrl tree to poke around but this patch didn't appear in any of the
> updated branches, so I'm not sure whether we have the right ordering.
> Without it we should hit build failures from missing macro definitions.
>
> Have you had a chance to look over patch 5/8? Joel wasn't keen on its
> current form, so I would appreciate your input.
Oops backed this patch out.
Will look at 5/8.
Appreciate if you repost the remaining patches in the series based on
v4.9-rc2 once it's out, and I'll rebase the pinctrl tree onto that.
Yours,
Linus Walleij
Powered by blists - more mailing lists