* Felipe Balbi [110405 06:00]:
>
> But the fact that Russell has already stated the next merge window is
> strictly for code consolidation already puts a stop sign in front of
> this patch :-) Still, Tony is the final judge.
Yes this would be for the next merge window. It is still unclear
what i
Hi,
On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 03:59:32PM +0300, Ameya Palande wrote:
> On 04/05/2011 03:38 PM, ext Felipe Balbi wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 03:34:08PM +0300, Ameya Palande wrote:
> >>>Exactly, adding a new feature. Let me put it this way: which bug or
> >>>regression are you fixing
Hi Felipe,
On 04/05/2011 03:38 PM, ext Felipe Balbi wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 03:34:08PM +0300, Ameya Palande wrote:
Exactly, adding a new feature. Let me put it this way: which bug or
regression are you fixing with this patch ?
I never claimed that it is fixing a bug/regression ;)
Hi,
On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 03:34:08PM +0300, Ameya Palande wrote:
> >Exactly, adding a new feature. Let me put it this way: which bug or
> >regression are you fixing with this patch ?
>
> I never claimed that it is fixing a bug/regression ;)
but you want this go into the RC cycle, which is stri
On 04/05/2011 03:30 PM, ext Felipe Balbi wrote:
On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 03:23:12PM +0300, Ameya Palande wrote:
On 04/05/2011 03:19 PM, ext Felipe Balbi wrote:
On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 03:10:41PM +0300, Ameya Palande wrote:
Hi Tony,
On 03/29/2011 10:33 PM, ext Tony Lindgren wrote:
* Sebastian
On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 03:23:12PM +0300, Ameya Palande wrote:
> On 04/05/2011 03:19 PM, ext Felipe Balbi wrote:
> >On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 03:10:41PM +0300, Ameya Palande wrote:
> >>Hi Tony,
> >>
> >>On 03/29/2011 10:33 PM, ext Tony Lindgren wrote:
> >>>* Sebastian Reichel [110329 11:13]:
>
On 04/05/2011 03:19 PM, ext Felipe Balbi wrote:
On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 03:10:41PM +0300, Ameya Palande wrote:
Hi Tony,
On 03/29/2011 10:33 PM, ext Tony Lindgren wrote:
* Sebastian Reichel [110329 11:13]:
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 10:36:47AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote:
* Sebastian Reichel
On Tue, Apr 05, 2011 at 03:10:41PM +0300, Ameya Palande wrote:
> Hi Tony,
>
> On 03/29/2011 10:33 PM, ext Tony Lindgren wrote:
> >* Sebastian Reichel [110329 11:13]:
> >>On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 10:36:47AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> >>>* Sebastian Reichel [110329 10:26]:
> Is there any rea
Hi Tony,
On 03/29/2011 10:33 PM, ext Tony Lindgren wrote:
* Sebastian Reichel [110329 11:13]:
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 10:36:47AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote:
* Sebastian Reichel [110329 10:26]:
Is there any reason, that the rx51 platform code does not support
the lp5523 chip? The chip driver
Hi Tony,
On 03/29/2011 10:33 PM, ext Tony Lindgren wrote:
* Sebastian Reichel [110329 11:13]:
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 10:36:47AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote:
* Sebastian Reichel [110329 10:26]:
Is there any reason, that the rx51 platform code does not support
the lp5523 chip? The chip driver
* Sebastian Reichel [110329 11:13]:
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 10:36:47AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > * Sebastian Reichel [110329 10:26]:
> > > Is there any reason, that the rx51 platform code does not support
> > > the lp5523 chip? The chip driver itself is in the mainline kernel
> > > since
On Tue, Mar 29, 2011 at 10:36:47AM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Sebastian Reichel [110329 10:26]:
> > Is there any reason, that the rx51 platform code does not support
> > the lp5523 chip? The chip driver itself is in the mainline kernel
> > since 2.6.37-rc2.
>
> Got a patch for that? As alway
* Sebastian Reichel [110329 10:26]:
> Hi,
>
> Is there any reason, that the rx51 platform code does not support
> the lp5523 chip? The chip driver itself is in the mainline kernel
> since 2.6.37-rc2.
Got a patch for that? As always, patches related to blinking leds
have a special high priority h
Hi,
Is there any reason, that the rx51 platform code does not support
the lp5523 chip? The chip driver itself is in the mainline kernel
since 2.6.37-rc2.
-- Sebastian
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
14 matches
Mail list logo
