On 02/08/2013 01:25 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Thu, 07 Feb 2013, Stephen Warren wrote:
>
>> On 02/07/2013 02:01 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
>>> I don't see myself on cc. Was that intentional?
>>
>> The original patch was that way; I assume git send-email only CC'd you
>> on patches written by you.
>
> No
On Thu, 07 Feb 2013, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 02/07/2013 02:01 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
> > I don't see myself on cc. Was that intentional?
>
> The original patch was that way; I assume git send-email only CC'd you
> on patches written by you.
No, I didn't send this patch at all.
I was asking Lin
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 10:01 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
> I don't see myself on cc. Was that intentional?
No, it was my mistake...
> I quite like the idea of this.
Can I take it as an ACK? :-)
> Stephen,
>
> It doesn't mean the other patch was wrong, it just transfers the math.
>
> I wouldn't squas
On 02/07/2013 02:01 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
> I don't see myself on cc. Was that intentional?
The original patch was that way; I assume git send-email only CC'd you
on patches written by you.
> I quite like the idea of this.
>
> Stephen,
>
> It doesn't mean the other patch was wrong, it just trans
On 02/05/2013 12:48 PM, Linus Walleij wrote:
> From: Linus Walleij
>
> Make it harder to do mistakes by introducing the actual
> defined ABx500 IRQ number into the IRQ cluster definitions.
> Deduct cluster offset from the GPIO offset to make each
> cluster coherent.
Shouldn't this patch be squas
From: Linus Walleij
Make it harder to do mistakes by introducing the actual
defined ABx500 IRQ number into the IRQ cluster definitions.
Deduct cluster offset from the GPIO offset to make each
cluster coherent.
Signed-off-by: Linus Walleij
---
drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-ab8500.c | 6 +++---
drive
6 matches
Mail list logo