[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4a0a50be-1465-0554-f787-dec72bc07a00@canonical.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2019 12:12:10 +0100
From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
To: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Keerthy <j-keerthy@...com>,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][next] regulator: lp87565: fix missing break in switch
statement
On 02/07/2019 11:44, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Jun 2019, Colin Ian King wrote:
>
>> On 28/06/2019 15:36, Mark Brown wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 02:16:39PM +0100, Colin King wrote:
>>>> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
>>>>
>>>> Currently the LP87565_DEVICE_TYPE_LP87561_Q1 case does not have a
>>>> break statement, causing it to fall through to a dev_err message.
>>>> Fix this by adding in the missing break statement.
>>>
>>> This doesn't apply against current code, please check and resend.
>>>
>> So it applies cleanly against linux-next, I think the original code
>> landed in mfd/for-mfd-next - c.f. https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/5/28/550
>
> Applied, thanks Colin.
>
I'm confused, who is the official maintainer of the regulator patches
nowadays?
Colin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists