Re: [PATCH] i2c: return probe deferred status on dev_pm_domain_attach

On 12 October 2015 at 20:40, Wolfram Sang wrote: > >> Should I add Cc: stable? or are they notified from the Fixes: tag? > > My preference is: I'll add stable when I commit to my tree. I am happy > if people tell me when they think this should be done. > > In this case, it should :) > Agreed :)

Re: [PATCH] i2c: return probe deferred status on dev_pm_domain_attach

> Should I add Cc: stable? or are they notified from the Fixes: tag? My preference is: I'll add stable when I commit to my tree. I am happy if people tell me when they think this should be done. In this case, it should :) signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Re: [PATCH] i2c: return probe deferred status on dev_pm_domain_attach

On 12 October 2015 at 08:24, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > And add the original patch author to CC when resending. > Bah - I was sure I'd added him ... must have slipped. Should I add Cc: stable? or are they notified from the Fixes: tag? -- Regards Kieran -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the

Re: [PATCH] i2c: return probe deferred status on dev_pm_domain_attach

Hi Wolfram, On 12 October 2015 at 08:23, Wolfram Sang wrote: > Hi Kiera, > > On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 12:39:31PM +0100, Kieran Bingham wrote: >> A change of return status was introduced in commit 3fffd1283927 >> ("i2c: allow specifying separate wakeup interrupt in device tree") > > Thanks for

Re: [PATCH] i2c: return probe deferred status on dev_pm_domain_attach

And add the original patch author to CC when resending. signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Re: [PATCH] i2c: return probe deferred status on dev_pm_domain_attach

Hi Kiera, On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 12:39:31PM +0100, Kieran Bingham wrote: > A change of return status was introduced in commit 3fffd1283927 > ("i2c: allow specifying separate wakeup interrupt in device tree") Thanks for catching this! > The commit prevents the defer status being passed up the

Re: [PATCH] i2c: return probe deferred status on dev_pm_domain_attach

And add the original patch author to CC when resending. signature.asc Description: Digital signature

Re: [PATCH] i2c: return probe deferred status on dev_pm_domain_attach

On 12 October 2015 at 08:24, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > And add the original patch author to CC when resending. > Bah - I was sure I'd added him ... must have slipped. Should I add Cc: stable? or are they notified from the Fixes: tag? -- Regards Kieran -- To unsubscribe from

Re: [PATCH] i2c: return probe deferred status on dev_pm_domain_attach

Hi Wolfram, On 12 October 2015 at 08:23, Wolfram Sang wrote: > Hi Kiera, > > On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 12:39:31PM +0100, Kieran Bingham wrote: >> A change of return status was introduced in commit 3fffd1283927 >> ("i2c: allow specifying separate wakeup interrupt in device

Re: [PATCH] i2c: return probe deferred status on dev_pm_domain_attach

Hi Kiera, On Sun, Oct 11, 2015 at 12:39:31PM +0100, Kieran Bingham wrote: > A change of return status was introduced in commit 3fffd1283927 > ("i2c: allow specifying separate wakeup interrupt in device tree") Thanks for catching this! > The commit prevents the defer status being passed up the

Re: [PATCH] i2c: return probe deferred status on dev_pm_domain_attach

On 12 October 2015 at 20:40, Wolfram Sang wrote: > >> Should I add Cc: stable? or are they notified from the Fixes: tag? > > My preference is: I'll add stable when I commit to my tree. I am happy > if people tell me when they think this should be done. > > In this case, it

Re: [PATCH] i2c: return probe deferred status on dev_pm_domain_attach

> Should I add Cc: stable? or are they notified from the Fixes: tag? My preference is: I'll add stable when I commit to my tree. I am happy if people tell me when they think this should be done. In this case, it should :) signature.asc Description: Digital signature

[PATCH] i2c: return probe deferred status on dev_pm_domain_attach

A change of return status was introduced in commit 3fffd1283927 ("i2c: allow specifying separate wakeup interrupt in device tree") The commit prevents the defer status being passed up the call stack appropriately when dev_pm_domain_attach returns -EPROBE_DEFER. To fix we change this back to the

[PATCH] i2c: return probe deferred status on dev_pm_domain_attach

A change of return status was introduced in commit 3fffd1283927 ("i2c: allow specifying separate wakeup interrupt in device tree") The commit prevents the defer status being passed up the call stack appropriately when dev_pm_domain_attach returns -EPROBE_DEFER. To fix we change this back to the