[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4cd4ff3a-5d90-4a5d-aae1-6017199e00c3@linaro.org>
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2024 12:14:04 +0100
From: Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@...aro.org>
To: Depeng Shao <quic_depengs@...cinc.com>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>, rfoss@...nel.org,
todor.too@...il.com, mchehab@...nel.org, robh@...nel.org,
krzk+dt@...nel.org, conor+dt@...nel.org
Cc: quic_eberman@...cinc.com, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel@...cinc.com,
Yongsheng Li <quic_yon@...cinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/13] media: qcom: camss: Add CSID Gen3 support for
SM8550
On 01/08/2024 11:59, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
> for preference every single patch applies and builds warning free.
Oops mistyped
- Every patch must apply cleanly
- You could make an argument for some specific cases that
a patch can generate a warning provided
- By the end of your set everything must be warning free
In this case though, I don't believe you need to make that case since,
the problem you describe about probe() isn't a problem at all as you
have no upstream dts that can drive the probe() at this point.
Just do the dts at the end and no problem.
---
bod
Powered by blists - more mailing lists