On Mon, 19 Nov 2012, Chris Ball wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Nov 19 2012, Lee Jones wrote:
> >> > There are discrepancies with regards to how MMC capabilities
> >> > are carried throughout the subsystem. Let's standardise them
> >> > to elevate any confusion.
> >>
> >> I think you meant "eliminate"
Hi,
On Mon, Nov 19 2012, Lee Jones wrote:
>> > There are discrepancies with regards to how MMC capabilities
>> > are carried throughout the subsystem. Let's standardise them
>> > to elevate any confusion.
>>
>> I think you meant "eliminate" here. :) Thanks,
>
> No, I meant alleviate. :)
>
> Do
On Sat, 17 Nov 2012, Chris Ball wrote:
> Hi Lee,
>
> Pushed to mmc-next for 3.8 with a minor change:
>
> On Wed, Nov 14 2012, Lee Jones wrote:
> > There are discrepancies with regards to how MMC capabilities
> > are carried throughout the subsystem. Let's standardise them
> > to elevate any
On Sat, 17 Nov 2012, Chris Ball wrote:
Hi Lee,
Pushed to mmc-next for 3.8 with a minor change:
On Wed, Nov 14 2012, Lee Jones wrote:
There are discrepancies with regards to how MMC capabilities
are carried throughout the subsystem. Let's standardise them
to elevate any confusion.
Hi,
On Mon, Nov 19 2012, Lee Jones wrote:
There are discrepancies with regards to how MMC capabilities
are carried throughout the subsystem. Let's standardise them
to elevate any confusion.
I think you meant eliminate here. :) Thanks,
No, I meant alleviate. :)
Do you want me to
On Mon, 19 Nov 2012, Chris Ball wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, Nov 19 2012, Lee Jones wrote:
There are discrepancies with regards to how MMC capabilities
are carried throughout the subsystem. Let's standardise them
to elevate any confusion.
I think you meant eliminate here. :) Thanks,
Hi Lee,
Pushed to mmc-next for 3.8 with a minor change:
On Wed, Nov 14 2012, Lee Jones wrote:
> There are discrepancies with regards to how MMC capabilities
> are carried throughout the subsystem. Let's standardise them
> to elevate any confusion.
I think you meant "eliminate" here. :)
Hi Lee,
Pushed to mmc-next for 3.8 with a minor change:
On Wed, Nov 14 2012, Lee Jones wrote:
There are discrepancies with regards to how MMC capabilities
are carried throughout the subsystem. Let's standardise them
to elevate any confusion.
I think you meant eliminate here. :) Thanks,
-
On Thursday 15 November 2012, Linus Walleij wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Lee Jones wrote:
>
> > There are discrepancies with regards to how MMC capabilities
> > are carried throughout the subsystem. Let's standardise them
> > to elevate any confusion.
> >
> > Cc: Chris Ball
> >
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Lee Jones wrote:
> There are discrepancies with regards to how MMC capabilities
> are carried throughout the subsystem. Let's standardise them
> to elevate any confusion.
>
> Cc: Chris Ball
> Cc: linux-...@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Lee Jones
Looks good
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Lee Jones lee.jo...@linaro.org wrote:
There are discrepancies with regards to how MMC capabilities
are carried throughout the subsystem. Let's standardise them
to elevate any confusion.
Cc: Chris Ball c...@laptop.org
Cc: linux-...@vger.kernel.org
On Thursday 15 November 2012, Linus Walleij wrote:
On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 1:35 PM, Lee Jones lee.jo...@linaro.org wrote:
There are discrepancies with regards to how MMC capabilities
are carried throughout the subsystem. Let's standardise them
to elevate any confusion.
Cc: Chris
There are discrepancies with regards to how MMC capabilities
are carried throughout the subsystem. Let's standardise them
to elevate any confusion.
Cc: Chris Ball
Cc: linux-...@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Lee Jones
---
drivers/mmc/core/mmc.c |2 +-
There are discrepancies with regards to how MMC capabilities
are carried throughout the subsystem. Let's standardise them
to elevate any confusion.
Cc: Chris Ball c...@laptop.org
Cc: linux-...@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Lee Jones lee.jo...@linaro.org
---
drivers/mmc/core/mmc.c
14 matches
Mail list logo
