On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 10:39:53AM +0100, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> On 12/11/2012 10:31 AM, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 09:57:51AM +0100, Peter Ujfalusi wrote:
> > Okay, if there are no intree users that may be broken, then it should be
> > fine to remove it. In that case you might want to remove the pwm_id
> > field as well instead of deprecating it in this patch.
> 
> The reason I marked the pwm_id as deprecated is to signal to out of tree users
> (if any) that they should stop using it since it is going to go away in the
> next cycle.
> If we remove it right away the sdp4030 board file will not going to compile in
> subsystem trees, only in linux-next.

Okay, go ahead then. As long as the field will be removed eventually
that's fine with me.

Thierry

Attachment: pgpCSdPdHeZNi.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to