Hi Fabio,
On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 05:19:11PM -0200, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> Hi Samuel,
>
> On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 10:51 AM, Samuel Ortiz wrote:
>
> >> I want to add mc34708 support to mx53qsb and need this series to be
> >> applied.
> > I understand. I'll queue it to my for-next branch as soon
Hi Samuel,
On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 10:51 AM, Samuel Ortiz wrote:
>> I want to add mc34708 support to mx53qsb and need this series to be applied.
> I understand. I'll queue it to my for-next branch as soon as the merge window
> is closed.
Could you please queue this series? I still do not see it
Hi,
On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 03:51:30PM +0200, Samuel Ortiz wrote:
> Did you send it to my samuel.or...@intel.com email ? I never look at it when
> going through my MFD backlog, which is why it was not applied. Which is why it
> won't be part of the 3.7 merge window, sorry about that.
I don't know
Hi Fabio,
On Thu, Oct 04, 2012 at 10:01:21AM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> Hi Samuel,
>
> On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 11:22 AM, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> > Hi Samuel,
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 8:02 PM, Marc Reilly wrote:
> >> Hi Uwe,
> >>
> >>> This series was tested on a Phytec pcm038 (mc13783 o
Hi Samuel,
On Wed, Sep 5, 2012 at 11:22 AM, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> Hi Samuel,
>
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 8:02 PM, Marc Reilly wrote:
>> Hi Uwe,
>>
>>> This series was tested on a Phytec pcm038 (mc13783 on spi) using
>>> traditional boot (i.e. not dt) and on a i.MX53 based machine (mc34708 on
>>
Hi Samuel,
On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 8:02 PM, Marc Reilly wrote:
> Hi Uwe,
>
>> This series was tested on a Phytec pcm038 (mc13783 on spi) using
>> traditional boot (i.e. not dt) and on a i.MX53 based machine (mc34708 on
>> i2c) using dt boot.
>>
>> Philippe's patches are already in next, they are
Hi Uwe,
On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 6:57 AM, Uwe Kleine-König
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> This series was tested on a Phytec pcm038 (mc13783 on spi) using
> traditional boot (i.e. not dt) and on a i.MX53 based machine (mc34708 on
> i2c) using dt boot.
>
> Philippe's patches are already in next, they are just
Uwe Kleine-König writes:
> It doesn't move it around, that's only how it looks. I removed enum
> mc13xxx_id (above MC13XXX_NUMREGS) and added struct mc13xxx_variant
> (below MC13XXX_NUMREGS). Git choosed to use the closing brace of enum
> mc13xxx_id and struct mc13xxx_variant respectively as con
Hello,
[I added git@vger.k.o to Cc: please strip the recipents accordingly if
you reply.]
On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 09:02:56AM +1000, Marc Reilly wrote:
> Hi Uwe,
>
> > This series was tested on a Phytec pcm038 (mc13783 on spi) using
> > traditional boot (i.e. not dt) and on a i.MX53 based machine
Hi Uwe,
> This series was tested on a Phytec pcm038 (mc13783 on spi) using
> traditional boot (i.e. not dt) and on a i.MX53 based machine (mc34708 on
> i2c) using dt boot.
>
> Philippe's patches are already in next, they are just included here for
> those who want to test the patches. The 'mfd/mc
Hello,
This series was tested on a Phytec pcm038 (mc13783 on spi) using
traditional boot (i.e. not dt) and on a i.MX53 based machine (mc34708 on
i2c) using dt boot.
Philippe's patches are already in next, they are just included here for
those who want to test the patches. The 'mfd/mc13xxx: drop m
11 matches
Mail list logo
