> > Thanks for this. This is a very rare case that’s easy to slip through.
> > It is good to be consistent :)
>
> I read this as acked-by for the series?
Ah, I mixed up. You acked V2 :)
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
> > Thanks for this. This is a very rare case that’s easy to slip through.
> > It is good to be consistent :)
>
> I read this as acked-by for the series?
Ah, I mixed up. You acked V2 :)
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 10:20:47PM +0300, Pantelis Antoniou wrote:
> Hi Ralf,
>
> > On Oct 16, 2016, at 12:55 , Ralf Ramsauer
> > wrote:
> >
> > Hi Geert,
> >
> > On 10/16/2016 10:49 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >> Hi Ralf,
> >>
> >> (Cc i2c)
> >>
> >> On
On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 10:20:47PM +0300, Pantelis Antoniou wrote:
> Hi Ralf,
>
> > On Oct 16, 2016, at 12:55 , Ralf Ramsauer
> > wrote:
> >
> > Hi Geert,
> >
> > On 10/16/2016 10:49 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >> Hi Ralf,
> >>
> >> (Cc i2c)
> >>
> >> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 9:31 PM,
Hi Ralf,
> On Oct 16, 2016, at 12:55 , Ralf Ramsauer wrote:
>
> Hi Geert,
>
> On 10/16/2016 10:49 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> Hi Ralf,
>>
>> (Cc i2c)
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 9:31 PM, Ralf Ramsauer
>> wrote:
>>>
Hi Ralf,
> On Oct 16, 2016, at 12:55 , Ralf Ramsauer wrote:
>
> Hi Geert,
>
> On 10/16/2016 10:49 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> Hi Ralf,
>>
>> (Cc i2c)
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 9:31 PM, Ralf Ramsauer
>> wrote:
>>> Instantiated SPI device nodes are marked with OF_POPULATE. This was
Hi Geert,
On 10/16/2016 10:49 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Ralf,
>
> (Cc i2c)
>
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 9:31 PM, Ralf Ramsauer
> wrote:
>> Instantiated SPI device nodes are marked with OF_POPULATE. This was
>> introduced in bd6c164. On unloading, loaded
Hi Geert,
On 10/16/2016 10:49 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Ralf,
>
> (Cc i2c)
>
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 9:31 PM, Ralf Ramsauer
> wrote:
>> Instantiated SPI device nodes are marked with OF_POPULATE. This was
>> introduced in bd6c164. On unloading, loaded device nodes will of course
>>
On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 10:49:11AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Ralf,
>
> (Cc i2c)
Thanks for letting me know! Adding Pantelis to CC, as he is the original
author of OF_DYNAMIC. Please keep me in the loop.
>
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 9:31 PM, Ralf Ramsauer
>
On Sun, Oct 16, 2016 at 10:49:11AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Ralf,
>
> (Cc i2c)
Thanks for letting me know! Adding Pantelis to CC, as he is the original
author of OF_DYNAMIC. Please keep me in the loop.
>
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 9:31 PM, Ralf Ramsauer
> wrote:
> > Instantiated
Hi Ralf,
(Cc i2c)
On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 9:31 PM, Ralf Ramsauer
wrote:
> Instantiated SPI device nodes are marked with OF_POPULATE. This was
> introduced in bd6c164. On unloading, loaded device nodes will of course
> be unmarked. The problem are nodes the fail
Hi Ralf,
(Cc i2c)
On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 9:31 PM, Ralf Ramsauer
wrote:
> Instantiated SPI device nodes are marked with OF_POPULATE. This was
> introduced in bd6c164. On unloading, loaded device nodes will of course
> be unmarked. The problem are nodes the fail during initialisation: If a
>
Instantiated SPI device nodes are marked with OF_POPULATE. This was
introduced in bd6c164. On unloading, loaded device nodes will of course
be unmarked. The problem are nodes the fail during initialisation: If a
node failed during registration, it won't be unloaded and hence never be
unmarked
Instantiated SPI device nodes are marked with OF_POPULATE. This was
introduced in bd6c164. On unloading, loaded device nodes will of course
be unmarked. The problem are nodes the fail during initialisation: If a
node failed during registration, it won't be unloaded and hence never be
unmarked
14 matches
Mail list logo