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
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 g
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 do
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 but,
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
> >> > an
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 isola
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 Rohá
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
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
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 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 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 tw
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
> > cal
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
19 matches
Mail list logo
