On Tue, 2015-03-03 at 11:37 +0800, Li, Aubrey wrote:
> On 2015/2/23 20:45, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Tue, 2015-01-20 at 23:49 +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >> This is the reworked patch series which had been sent earlier [1] to 
> >> support
> >> Intel CherryTrail SoC.
> >>
> >> The patches were tested on both BayTrail and CherryTrail SoCs.
> >>
> >> [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/5235891/
> > 
> > Aubrey, is everything is clear for you now? Can I send v3 with your
> > Ack's?

> The patches overall look good to me, except a few minor comments need to
> be addressed in the last conversation. For example, I think we don't
> need patch 1/4 if we won't use dev_print.

We still use them. Like I said the patch has no relations to the series,
though it simplifies already existing function.


>  some other changes might be
> necessary only if they makes code cleaner and works better.

Thus, I think the patch 1/4 is still useful.

> Certainly, it would be better if other x86 maintainers can take a look
> at these patches.

Agree.

-- 
Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]>
Intel Finland Oy

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to