Hi,
On Fri, Apr 03, 2015 at 10:49:12AM +0200, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> >> The convention nowadays is to not use unnamed DT properties for GPIOs
> >> but instead use a prefix that explains what those GPIOs are used for.
> >> So something like "power-gpios" or "power-gpio" (if there is only
Hello Pavel,
On Fri, Apr 3, 2015 at 10:21 AM, Pavel Machek wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> > Fixed feedback by Sakari.
>> >
>> > Please apply,
>>
>> There is no need to ask for patches to be applied IMHO. It is expected
>> that people post patches wanting them to be applied unless there is an
>> RFC prefix in
Hi!
> > Fixed feedback by Sakari.
> >
> > Please apply,
>
> There is no need to ask for patches to be applied IMHO. It is expected
> that people post patches wanting them to be applied unless there is an
> RFC prefix in the subject or say explicitly that the patch is for
> testing and should not
Hello Pavel,
I haven't reviewed the patch since I'm not familiar with the hardware
but just wanted to point out a couple of things that I spot:
On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 10:34 PM, Pavel Machek wrote:
>
>
> We are moving to device tree support on OMAP3, but that currently
> breaks ADP1653 driver. Th
We are moving to device tree support on OMAP3, but that currently
breaks ADP1653 driver. This adds device tree support, plus required
documentation.
Signed-off-by: Pavel Machek
---
Fixed feedback by Sakari.
Please apply,
Pavel
diff --
5 matches
Mail list logo
