[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130920151552.GQ26101@radagast>
Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 10:15:52 -0500
From: Felipe Balbi <balbi@...com>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
CC: Felipe Balbi <balbi@...com>, <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>,
<b43-dev@...ts.infradead.org>, <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
<e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
<linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-ide@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-media@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
<linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
<linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Solarflare linux maintainers <linux-net-drivers@...arflare.com>,
<uclinux-dist-devel@...ckfin.uclinux.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 42/51] DMA-API: usb: musb: use
platform_device_register_full() to avoid directly messing with dma masks
Hi,
On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 02:49:38PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 08:11:25AM -0500, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 20, 2013 at 12:14:38AM +0100, Russell King wrote:
> > > Use platform_device_register_full() for those drivers which can, to
> > > avoid messing directly with DMA masks. This can only be done when
> > > the driver does not need to access the allocated musb platform device
> > > from within its callbacks, which may be called during the musb
> > > device probing.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@....linux.org.uk>
> >
> > you want me to carry this one through my tree or you prefer getting my
> > Acked-by ? Either way works for me:
> >
> > Acked-by: Felipe Balbi <balbi@...com>
> >
> > there's also the third option of me setting up a branch with only this
> > patch and we both merge it, that'd also work.
>
> I think this patch is sufficiently stand-alone that it should be fine
> if you want to take it through your tree. That may be better in the
> long run to avoid conflicts with this patch and any future work in
> this area during this cycle.
awesome, i'll take this one early next week.
--
balbi
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists