Hi Wolfram,
> On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 10:41:01AM -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > We should not leave i2c_register_board_info() early, without unlocking the
> > __i2c_board_lock.
> >
> > Fixes: b0c1e95ab44f ("i2c: copy device properties when using ...")
> > Signed-off-by: Dmitry Torokhov <[email protected]>
>
> So, it seems that patches 1+2 are related. Because I'd like to have
> patch 2 sitting in for-next for a whole cycle for sure, my plan is to
> revert the faulty b0c1e95ab44f from for-current and apply the fixed
> version (b0c1e95ab44f + this patch squashed) to for-next as well.
>
> Is that okay with you?
I am perfectly fine with reverting b0c1e95ab44f from for-current,
however I wonder if we could have an immutable branch off 4.11-rc2 (or
-rc1) containing fixed version of patch copying property + patch adding
resources + patch exporting i2c_client_type (I will CC you on that
shortly), which we could share between your tree and mine so I can get
in changes to a few drivers on my side (eeti_ts, atmel, etc).
If you are OK with this I can prepare said branch.
Thanks!
--
Dmitry
