[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAFRkauBACWC1pcxJe9tJyK4vM2R2BSu2z9sej3GLket3niZg9w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2019 08:57:53 +0800
From: Axel Lin <axel.lin@...ics.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: Keerthy <j-keerthy@...com>, Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFT] regulator: lp87565: Fix probe failure for "ti,lp87565"
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> 於 2019年7月24日 週三 上午12:35寫道:
>
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 08:28:35PM +0800, Axel Lin wrote:
> > Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> 於 2019年7月23日 週二 下午7:26寫道:
> > > On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 07:35:17PM +0800, Axel Lin wrote:
>
> > > > The "ti,lp87565" compatible string is still in of_lp87565_match_table,
> > > > but current code will return -EINVAL because lp87565->dev_type is unknown.
> > > > This was working in earlier kernel versions, so fix it.
>
> > > This doesn't seem to apply against current code, please check and
> > > resend.
>
> > I re-generate the patch but the new patch is exactly the same as this one.
> > It can be applied to both Linus and linux-next trees.
> > Did I miss something?
>
> It's a fix so I was trying to apply it on my for-5.3 branch.
The commit f3f4363b1239 ("regulator: lp87565: Fix missing break in
switch statement") from mfd tree has been merged to 5.3-rc1.
So I'm wondering if the better approach is rebase for-5.3 branch to 5.3-rc1.
Then you can apply this patch without conflict.
Anyway, I will resend the patch against regulator tree for-5.3.
Regards,
Axel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists