[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 5 May 2017 12:40:05 +0200
From: Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@...hile0.org>
To: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc: Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
Aaro Koskinen <aaro.koskinen@....fi>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/8] mfd: Add OF device table to I2C drivers that are
missing it
Hello,
On Thu, May 4, 2017 at 1:50 PM, Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 04 May 2017, Wolfram Sang wrote:
>> thanks for the series.
>>
>> > Most patches can be applied independently, with the exception of patches
>> > 2 to 4 that should be applied in the same tree to keep bisect-ability. I
>> > suggest these to go through the MFD subsystem tree.
>>
>> From my POV, patches 2-5 should be applied to the same tree. Since all
Yes, I didn't mention 5 because is just a documentation change. But it
would be better if is merged together with 2-4 indeed.
>> I2C related patches have my tag, I assume they will be picked up by MFD.
>> Lee, let me know if you prefer differently.
>
> I can pick them up, no problem. Can the ARM patches be taking
> independently? I'm guessing they can since they are separate from one
> another.
>
That's corect. The only platform changes that can't be picked
independently from MFD are the ones in patch 2, but tha's why I added
in the same patch. The OMAP folks (Tony and Aaro) already acked so you
can pick it.
Best regards,
Javier
Powered by blists - more mailing lists