On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 06:43:49PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
> On Wednesday 18 September 2013 18:36:49 Felipe Balbi wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 05:56:12PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 18 September 2013 15:57:13 Javier Martinez
> > > Canillas
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > > > to
On Wednesday 18 September 2013 18:36:49 Felipe Balbi wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 05:56:12PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > On Wednesday 18 September 2013 15:57:13 Javier Martinez
> > Canillas
> >
> > wrote:
> > > to split the patch in two since the patch was solving
> > > two separate issues
>
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 05:56:12PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
> On Wednesday 18 September 2013 15:57:13 Javier Martinez Canillas
> wrote:
> > to split the patch in two since the patch was solving
> > two separate issues
>
> My patch does not solving *two* issues. It is *one* regression
> and both
Hi,
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 04:35:37PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
> > > gave feedback. If the sender doesn't want to take his feedback into
> > > account and prefer to send pretty insulting emails instead that is his
> > > choice but I would say that is this not the greatest approach to
On Wednesday 18 September 2013 15:57:13 Javier Martinez Canillas
wrote:
> to split the patch in two since the patch was solving
> two separate issues
My patch does not solving *two* issues. It is *one* regression
and both parts of patch are needed for fixing it. Read commit
message again. It
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 4:22 PM, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> >> >> > So will you do that? Or it is needed to resend this one line
>> >> >> > hunk again in new email again?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> new patch, new email
>> >> >
>> >> > Guys, WHY ARE YOU SO STUPID AND ARROGANT?
>> >> >
>> >> > Sorry
Hi!
> > gave feedback. If the sender doesn't want to take his feedback into
> > account and prefer to send pretty insulting emails instead that is his
> > choice but I would say that is this not the greatest approach to get
> > your code merged (to say the least).
>
> Clearly not. But Pali found
Hi!
> >> >> > So will you do that? Or it is needed to resend this one line
> >> >> > hunk again in new email again?
> >> >>
> >> >> new patch, new email
> >> >
> >> > Guys, WHY ARE YOU SO STUPID AND ARROGANT?
> >> >
> >> > Sorry but, need to copy full isolated patch/hunk from one mail to
> >> >
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> >> > So will you do that? Or it is needed to resend this one line
>> >> > hunk again in new email again?
>> >>
>> >> new patch, new email
>> >
>> > Guys, WHY ARE YOU SO STUPID AND ARROGANT?
>> >
>> > Sorry but, need to copy full
Hi!
> >> > So will you do that? Or it is needed to resend this one line
> >> > hunk again in new email again?
> >>
> >> new patch, new email
> >
> > Guys, WHY ARE YOU SO STUPID AND ARROGANT?
> >
> > Sorry but, need to copy full isolated patch/hunk from one mail to
> > another is hassling. So what
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 10:20 AM, Pali Rohár wrote:
> On Wednesday 18 September 2013 03:49:42 Felipe Balbi wrote:
>> On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 09:28:42PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
>> > On Tuesday 17 September 2013 18:08:35 Felipe Balbi wrote:
>> > > On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 06:05:15PM +0200, Pali
On Wednesday 18 September 2013 03:49:42 Felipe Balbi wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 09:28:42PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > On Tuesday 17 September 2013 18:08:35 Felipe Balbi wrote:
> > > On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 06:05:15PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday 17 September 2013 17:48:59
On Wednesday 18 September 2013 03:49:42 Felipe Balbi wrote:
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 09:28:42PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
On Tuesday 17 September 2013 18:08:35 Felipe Balbi wrote:
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 06:05:15PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
On Tuesday 17 September 2013 17:48:59 you wrote:
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 10:20 AM, Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday 18 September 2013 03:49:42 Felipe Balbi wrote:
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 09:28:42PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
On Tuesday 17 September 2013 18:08:35 Felipe Balbi wrote:
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 06:05:15PM
Hi!
So will you do that? Or it is needed to resend this one line
hunk again in new email again?
new patch, new email
Guys, WHY ARE YOU SO STUPID AND ARROGANT?
Sorry but, need to copy full isolated patch/hunk from one mail to
another is hassling. So what you want from me? Do
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Pavel Machek pa...@ucw.cz wrote:
Hi!
So will you do that? Or it is needed to resend this one line
hunk again in new email again?
new patch, new email
Guys, WHY ARE YOU SO STUPID AND ARROGANT?
Sorry but, need to copy full isolated patch/hunk from
Hi!
So will you do that? Or it is needed to resend this one line
hunk again in new email again?
new patch, new email
Guys, WHY ARE YOU SO STUPID AND ARROGANT?
Sorry but, need to copy full isolated patch/hunk from one mail to
another is hassling. So what you want from
Hi!
gave feedback. If the sender doesn't want to take his feedback into
account and prefer to send pretty insulting emails instead that is his
choice but I would say that is this not the greatest approach to get
your code merged (to say the least).
Clearly not. But Pali found bug in
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 4:22 PM, Pavel Machek pa...@ucw.cz wrote:
Hi!
So will you do that? Or it is needed to resend this one line
hunk again in new email again?
new patch, new email
Guys, WHY ARE YOU SO STUPID AND ARROGANT?
Sorry but, need to copy full isolated
On Wednesday 18 September 2013 15:57:13 Javier Martinez Canillas
wrote:
to split the patch in two since the patch was solving
two separate issues
My patch does not solving *two* issues. It is *one* regression
and both parts of patch are needed for fixing it. Read commit
message again. It
Hi,
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 04:35:37PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
Hi!
gave feedback. If the sender doesn't want to take his feedback into
account and prefer to send pretty insulting emails instead that is his
choice but I would say that is this not the greatest approach to get
your
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 05:56:12PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
On Wednesday 18 September 2013 15:57:13 Javier Martinez Canillas
wrote:
to split the patch in two since the patch was solving
two separate issues
My patch does not solving *two* issues. It is *one* regression
and both parts of
On Wednesday 18 September 2013 18:36:49 Felipe Balbi wrote:
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 05:56:12PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
On Wednesday 18 September 2013 15:57:13 Javier Martinez
Canillas
wrote:
to split the patch in two since the patch was solving
two separate issues
My patch
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 06:43:49PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
On Wednesday 18 September 2013 18:36:49 Felipe Balbi wrote:
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 05:56:12PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
On Wednesday 18 September 2013 15:57:13 Javier Martinez
Canillas
wrote:
to split the patch in two
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 09:28:42PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
> On Tuesday 17 September 2013 18:08:35 Felipe Balbi wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 06:05:15PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 17 September 2013 17:48:59 you wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 10:50:36AM +0200, Pali
On Tuesday 17 September 2013 18:08:35 Felipe Balbi wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 06:05:15PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > On Tuesday 17 September 2013 17:48:59 you wrote:
> > > On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 10:50:36AM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > > > More power supply drivers depends on vbus events
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 06:05:15PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
> On Tuesday 17 September 2013 17:48:59 you wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 10:50:36AM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > > More power supply drivers depends on vbus events and without
> > > it they not working. Power supply drivers using
>
On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 10:50:36AM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
> More power supply drivers depends on vbus events and without it they not
> working. Power supply drivers using usb_register_notifier, so to deliver
> events it is needed to call atomic_notifier_call_chain.
>
> So without atomic
On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 10:50:36AM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c
> b/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c
> index 8f78d2d..efe6155 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c
> @@ -705,6 +705,8 @@ static int
On Tuesday 17 September 2013 17:48:59 you wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 10:50:36AM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
> > More power supply drivers depends on vbus events and without
> > it they not working. Power supply drivers using
> > usb_register_notifier, so to deliver events it is needed to
> >
On Tuesday 17 September 2013 17:48:59 you wrote:
On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 10:50:36AM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
More power supply drivers depends on vbus events and without
it they not working. Power supply drivers using
usb_register_notifier, so to deliver events it is needed to
call
On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 10:50:36AM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c
b/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c
index 8f78d2d..efe6155 100644
--- a/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c
@@ -705,6 +705,8 @@ static int
On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 10:50:36AM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
More power supply drivers depends on vbus events and without it they not
working. Power supply drivers using usb_register_notifier, so to deliver
events it is needed to call atomic_notifier_call_chain.
So without atomic notifier
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 06:05:15PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
On Tuesday 17 September 2013 17:48:59 you wrote:
On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 10:50:36AM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
More power supply drivers depends on vbus events and without
it they not working. Power supply drivers using
On Tuesday 17 September 2013 18:08:35 Felipe Balbi wrote:
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 06:05:15PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
On Tuesday 17 September 2013 17:48:59 you wrote:
On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 10:50:36AM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
More power supply drivers depends on vbus events and
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 09:28:42PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
On Tuesday 17 September 2013 18:08:35 Felipe Balbi wrote:
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 06:05:15PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
On Tuesday 17 September 2013 17:48:59 you wrote:
On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 10:50:36AM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
More power supply drivers depends on vbus events and without it they not
working. Power supply drivers using usb_register_notifier, so to deliver
events it is needed to call atomic_notifier_call_chain.
So without atomic notifier power supply driver isp1704 not retrieving
vbus status and reporting
More power supply drivers depends on vbus events and without it they not
working. Power supply drivers using usb_register_notifier, so to deliver
events it is needed to call atomic_notifier_call_chain.
So without atomic notifier power supply driver isp1704 not retrieving
vbus status and reporting
38 matches
Mail list logo
