[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87cc8c77-7b39-1746-4680-cb26d602e62e@codeaurora.org>
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2018 11:04:17 -0700
From: David Collins <collinsd@...eaurora.org>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
Cc: Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@...eaurora.org>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>,
Andy Gross <andy.gross@...aro.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 2/2] regulator: add QCOM RPMh regulator driver
Hello Mark,
On 06/28/2018 03:18 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 09:28:03AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote:
>
>> OK, great. I guess I'm confused about the "|| COMPILE_TEST" causing
>> problems then? I was worried that anyone trying to do "COMPILE_TEST"
>> on your tree (or linuxnext if RPMh isn't there) would get failures due
>> to the lack of header files. I guess if it's a problem you could just
>> gut the "|| COMPILE_TEST" and it could be added back in later?
>
> Ugh, yes - that'll break things. In that case I can't apply this
> without a signed tag from Andy's tree with the dependency stuff in.
>
Do you have any remaining concerns with the qcom-rpmh-regulator binding
and driver patches that would keep you from applying them (other than the
dependency patches being applied first)?
Thanks,
David
--
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
Powered by blists - more mailing lists