On 4 May 2016 at 14:09, Simon Glass <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Stephen, > > On 4 May 2016 at 14:02, Stephen Warren <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 05/04/2016 01:48 PM, Simon Glass wrote: >>> >>> +Tom Rini >>> >>> Hi Stephen, >>> >>> On 4 May 2016 at 13:46, Stephen Warren <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 05/04/2016 01:31 PM, Simon Glass wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hi Stephen, >>>>> >>>>> On 4 May 2016 at 12:57, Stephen Warren <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 04/19/2016 04:19 PM, Stephen Warren wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> From: Stephen Warren <[email protected]> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In some cases, drivers may not want to bind to a device. Allow bind() >>>>>>> to >>>>>>> return -ENODEV in this case, and don't treat this as an error. This >>>>>>> can >>>>>>> be useful in situations where some information source other than the >>>>>>> DT >>>>>>> node's main status property indicates whether the device should be >>>>>>> enabled, for example other DT properties might indicate this, or the >>>>>>> driver might query non-DT sources such as system fuses or a version >>>>>>> number >>>>>>> register. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Simon, this series is assigned to you in patchwork. Are you the right >>>>>> person >>>>>> to apply it? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Yes. but not for this release, right? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Patch 2 in the series (which depends on this patch) fixes a bug for Tegra >>>> boards with LCD panels. Admittedly it appears to be only cosmetic (an >>>> error >>>> message is printed at boot), but "it's a bug" seems to satisfy the >>>> requirement to apply it for this release. >>> >>> >>> Sorry, I didn't know that. Given the core nature of this patch I would >>> rather wait, and apply it next week. Let me know if you disagree. >> >> >> I suppose that it's been broken long enough that another release won't >> matter. >> >> Was my explanation of the bug in the description of patch 2/2 not clear in >> some way? > > Looks good to me. Were you expecting me to apply both as a bug fix? If > so I'd prefer to have Tom Warren's ACK. Even so, a core patch like > this really needs the full test cycle IMO. > > Regards, > Simon
Applied to u-boot-dm, thanks! _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
