[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1478558520.6206.4.camel@aj.id.au>
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2016 09:12:00 +1030
From: Andrew Jeffery <andrew@...id.au>
To: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Joel Stanley <joel@....id.au>
Cc: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
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>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] pinctrl-aspeed-g5: Never set SCU90[6]
On Mon, 2016-11-07 at 10:34 +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 11:59 PM, Joel Stanley <joel@....id.au> wrote:
>
> > In the future I think we should send fixes separately from the rest of
> > the series, so it's clear to Linus where we expect patches to end up.
> >
> > Perhaps Linus can share his preference with us?
>
> Just make it clear to me where the patch is headed, if it is
> a fix or a new feature.
>
> Also mixing stuff in big series is of course problematic because
> all the CC:in on MFD patches and whatnot that I don't apply
> makes the picture blurry, but sometimes it is anyways needed
> for context so it is a soft requirement.
Context was my concern here and I would otherwise have split the rest
of the patches along mfd/pinctrl boundaries. I felt the situation was
odd enough to warrant presenting the full picture.
Andrew
>
> Yours,
> Linus Walleij
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (802 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists