Hello Lee,
On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 12:46 AM, Lee Jones lee.jo...@linaro.org wrote:
On Fri, 12 Sep 2014, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
So what I propose is to do it incrementally:
1) Merge Lee's series since that is definitely a step in the right
direction to not make an I2C table mandatory
On Fri, 12 Sep 2014, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
[adding Sjoerd as cc who was the one that raised the module auto-loading
issue]
Hello,
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 3:46 PM, Wolfram Sang w...@the-dreams.de wrote:
Placing this firmly back on your plate. I truly hope we don't miss
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 03:35:30PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
Hi Wolfram,
Placing this firmly back on your plate. I truly hope we don't miss
another merge-window. This patch-set has the support of some pretty
senior kernel maintainers, so I hope acceptance shouldn't be too
difficult.
As
[adding Sjoerd as cc who was the one that raised the module auto-loading issue]
Hello,
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 3:46 PM, Wolfram Sang w...@the-dreams.de wrote:
Placing this firmly back on your plate. I truly hope we don't miss
another merge-window. This patch-set has the support of some
Hi Lee,
Placing this firmly back on your plate. I truly hope we don't miss
another merge-window.
Nope, we won't. I'll still need a week or so due to other duties.
This patch-set has the support of some pretty
senior kernel maintainers, so I hope acceptance shouldn't be too
difficult.
On Fri, 29 Aug 2014, Wolfram Sang wrote:
Placing this firmly back on your plate. I truly hope we don't miss
another merge-window.
Nope, we won't. I'll still need a week or so due to other duties.
Perfectly reasonable.
This patch-set has the support of some pretty
senior kernel
Hi Wolfram,
Placing this firmly back on your plate. I truly hope we don't miss
another merge-window. This patch-set has the support of some pretty
senior kernel maintainers, so I hope acceptance shouldn't be too
difficult.
As previously discussed I believe it should be okay for an I2C device
