Daniel Thompson writes:
>
> ... I worry that palmtc.c is no longer compilable for some configs.
I you're right, there is a very simple way to test it :
make pxa_defconfig && make -j
It should scream if the compilation is broken, and the kernel CI should
certainly protect us.
Cheers.
--
On Fri, Dec 13, 2019 at 6:30 PM Robert Jarzmik wrote:
> Daniel Thompson writes:
> >
> > ... I worry that palmtc.c is no longer compilable for some configs.
> I you're right, there is a very simple way to test it :
> make pxa_defconfig && make -j
>
> It should scream if the compilation is broken,
czw., 5 gru 2019 o 09:11 Linus Walleij napisał(a):
>
> The PWM backlight still supports passing a enable GPIO line as
> platform data using the legacy API.
>
> It turns out that ever board using this mechanism except one
> is pass .enable_gpio = -1. So we drop all these cargo-culted -1's
> from
On Thu, 05 Dec 2019, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> czw., 5 gru 2019 o 09:11 Linus Walleij napisał(a):
> >
> > The PWM backlight still supports passing a enable GPIO line as
> > platform data using the legacy API.
> >
> > It turns out that ever board using this mechanism except one
> > is pass
On Thu, Dec 05, 2019 at 09:11:16AM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> The PWM backlight still supports passing a enable GPIO line as
> platform data using the legacy API.
>
> It turns out that ever board using this mechanism except one
> is pass .enable_gpio = -1. So we drop all these cargo-culted
The PWM backlight still supports passing a enable GPIO line as
platform data using the legacy API.
It turns out that ever board using this mechanism except one
is pass .enable_gpio = -1. So we drop all these cargo-culted -1's
from all instances of this platform data in the kernel.
The remaning
