[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240618-prehistoric-amphibian-firefly-a9b2d2-mkl@pengutronix.de>
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2024 18:06:02 +0200
From: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: Stefan Moring <stefan.moring@...hnolution.nl>,
Adam Butcher <adam@...samine.co.uk>, Benjamin Bigler <benjamin@...ler.one>,
Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>, s.hauer@...gutronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Stefan Bigler <linux@...ler.io>, linux-spi@...r.kernel.org,
Thorsten Scherer <T.Scherer@...elmann.de>, Clark Wang <xiaoning.wang@....com>, linux-imx@....com,
kernel@...gutronix.de, Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>, shawnguo@...nel.org,
Carlos Song <carlos.song@....com>, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] spi: Increase imx51 ecspi burst length based on transfer
length
Hey Mark,
On 18.06.2024 17:02:22, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 05:59:36PM +0200, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote:
>
> > This patch (15a6af94a277 ("spi: Increase imx51 ecspi burst length based
> > on transfer length")) is wrong and the 4 fixes on top of it don't
> > finally fix it. I can send a series of 5 reverts, or a manually revert
> > the burst length calculation to the original value in one patch.
>
> A single revert should be fine and is probably clearer.
thanks for your quick answer. What about the Fixes-tag? Just the
original patch?
Fixes: 15a6af94a277 ("spi: Increase imx51 ecspi burst length based on transfer length")
regards,
Marc
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Marc Kleine-Budde |
Embedded Linux | https://www.pengutronix.de |
Vertretung Nürnberg | Phone: +49-5121-206917-129 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-9 |
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists