> Are you taking these soon? I've rebased on -next, but they're
> still in my local delta.
Applied to -next now, will push out later today.
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Wolfram Sang|
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Hi Wolfram,
Are you taking these soon? I've rebased on -next, but they're
still in my local delta.
Kind regards,
Lee
--
Lee Jones
Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send t
> > Documentation: Device Tree binding information for i2c-nomadik driver
> > (Documentation should go along with the code)
>
> I'm still not too sure about how this benefits anyone. You can ensure
> the documentation is placed in an adjacent patch, so it's just as easy
> to make
> > Now there is:
> > git://git.linaro.org/people/ljones/linux-3.0-ux500.git preview-for-next
>
> OK from having a glimpse, I'd prefer to squash (or have squashed)
>
> i2c: nomadik: Add Device Tree support to the Nomadik I2C driver
> i2c-nomadik: Register sub-devices when passed via
> Ah, sorry. That's my fault for rushing though my ridiculously bloated post-
> vacation inbox.
:)
> > all the infos I got. Some more context would have been helpful. Is there
> > a branch somewhere with all the things collected?
>
> There will be. I'm currently just Ack collecting.
>
> In fa
> > > First, I'd like to have this patch squashed with "i2c: nomadik: Add
> > > Device Tree support to the Nomadik I2C driver". I wanted to do this on
> > > my own, but the patches do not apply to 3.6-rc5 (with or without
> > > regulator removal patch from Linus)?
> >
> > I'm really not keen on s
Hi,
> > First, I'd like to have this patch squashed with "i2c: nomadik: Add
> > Device Tree support to the Nomadik I2C driver". I wanted to do this on
> > my own, but the patches do not apply to 3.6-rc5 (with or without
> > regulator removal patch from Linus)?
>
> I'm really not keen on squashing
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 12:52:02PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 04:42:36AM -0700, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Lee Jones wrote:
> >
> > > Each I2C device can be correctly probed already using Device Tree,
> > > but the sub-devices still have to
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 04:42:36AM -0700, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Lee Jones wrote:
>
> > Each I2C device can be correctly probed already using Device Tree,
> > but the sub-devices still have to be registered by calls to
> > i2c_register_board_info(). After this patc
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 04:42:36AM -0700, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Lee Jones wrote:
>
> > Each I2C device can be correctly probed already using Device Tree,
> > but the sub-devices still have to be registered by calls to
> > i2c_register_board_info(). After this patc
On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 1:14 PM, Lee Jones wrote:
> Each I2C device can be correctly probed already using Device Tree,
> but the sub-devices still have to be registered by calls to
> i2c_register_board_info(). After this patch, each sub-device can
> be registered directly from Device Tree instead,
Each I2C device can be correctly probed already using Device Tree,
but the sub-devices still have to be registered by calls to
i2c_register_board_info(). After this patch, each sub-device can
be registered directly from Device Tree instead, removing the
requirement for the aforementioned calls from
12 matches
Mail list logo
