[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2022 09:12:49 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount@...il.com>
Cc: Matti Vaittinen <matti.vaittinen@...rohmeurope.com>,
Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Jagath Jog J <jagathjog1996@...il.com>,
Nikita Yushchenko <nikita.yoush@...entembedded.com>,
Cosmin Tanislav <demonsingur@...il.com>,
linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/5] regulator: Add devm helpers for get and enable
On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 07:13:23AM +0300, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
> On 10/6/22 19:17, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 06, 2022 at 05:36:52PM +0300, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
> > > A few regulator consumer drivers seem to be just getting a regulator,
> > > enabling it and registering a devm-action to disable the regulator at
> > > the driver detach and then forget about it.
> > >
> > > We can simplify this a bit by adding a devm-helper for this pattern.
> > > Add devm_regulator_get_enable() and devm_regulator_get_enable_optional()
...
> > > (cherry picked from commit b6058e052b842a19c8bb639798d8692cd0e7589f)
> >
> > Not sure:
> > - why this is in the commit message
> > - what it points to, since
> > $ git show b6058e052b842a19c8bb639798d8692cd0e7589f
> > fatal: bad object b6058e052b842a19c8bb639798d8692cd0e7589f
> >
> > > Already in Mark's regulator tree. Not to be merged. Included just for
> > > the sake of the completeness. Will be dropped when series is rebased on
> > > top of the 6.1-rc1
> >
> > Ah, I see, but does it mean the commit has been rebased or you used wrong SHA?
>
> I did probably cherry-pick this from my local development branch and not
> from Mark's tree. Sorry for the confusion. I thought people would ignore
> these first two patches when reviewing as was requested in cover-letter.
The solution as pointed out by LKP and which will removes the need of the noise
in email and a lot of confusions is to use --base parameter to the patch(es).
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists