[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190731172613.32d65ad8@coco.lan>
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 17:26:13 -0300
From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+samsung@...nel.org>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...radead.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, alsa-devel@...a-project.org,
Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...tlin.com>,
samba-technical@...ts.samba.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
Evgeniy Dushistov <dushistov@...l.ru>,
Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
Peter Meerwald-Stadler <pmeerw@...erw.net>,
Steve French <sfrench@...ba.org>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@....com>,
linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org, Dave Kleikamp <shaggy@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Evgeniy Polyakov <zbr@...emap.net>,
Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
jfs-discussion@...ts.sourceforge.net,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Hartmut Knaack <knaack.h@....de>, linux-spi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] ReST conversion patches not applied yet
Em Wed, 31 Jul 2019 21:20:07 +0100
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> escreveu:
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 02:17:34PM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> > Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+samsung@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> > > As promised, this is the rebased version of the patches that were not applied
> > > from the /26 patch series because you had merge conflicts.
> > >
> > > They're all based on your docs-next branch, so should apply fine.
> > >
> > > The first one fixes all but one error with a broken reference.
> > >
> > > The only broken reference right now is due to a DT patch with was not
> > > accepted (no idea why), but whose driver is upstream.
>
> > All but 5/6 applied, thanks.
>
> Oh, I still hadn't reviewed this version of the SPI stuff :(
It is basically the one sent on that /26 patch series, just rebased
on the top of docs-next.
> There were outstanding questions about where it was going to get moved
> to but if I read the diff correctly it looks like it didn't actually get
> moved in the end?
Yeah, it doesn't have the move. My understanding from our discussions
is that we didn't reach a conclusion.
In any case, I can send a separate patch with the move part once
we reach an agreement about what's the best way to proceed (or you
can do it directly, if you prefer so).
Thanks,
Mauro
Powered by blists - more mailing lists