[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190124102454.GA5641@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2019 10:24:54 +0000
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Matti Vaittinen <matti.vaittinen@...rohmeurope.com>
Cc: mazziesaccount@...il.com, lee.jones@...aro.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
mark.rutland@....com, lgirdwood@...il.com,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, rafael@...nel.org,
mturquette@...libre.com, sboyd@...nel.org,
linus.walleij@...aro.org, bgolaszewski@...libre.com,
sre@...nel.org, a.zummo@...ertech.it,
alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com, wim@...ux-watchdog.org,
linux@...ck-us.net, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-rtc@...r.kernel.org, linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org,
mikko.mutanen@...rohmeurope.com, heikki.haikola@...rohmeurope.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 03/13] regulator: bd718x7 use chip specific and
generic data structs
On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 09:16:35AM +0200, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
> Yes. If we don't want to break the compilation between commits then
> the patches 2, 3 and 4 should be squashed into one. I sent them as
> separare changes for easier review. I can squash them and send them
> squashed if they are Ok to Lee and Stephen. Please just let me know
> whose tree I should use as the basis so I can do rebasing if needed.
> (Or is there some better way to do changes like this?)
I'd guess Lee's but check with him and Stephen.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists