On Sep 23, 2008, at 9:12 AM, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
of/base.c matches on the first (most specific) entries, which isn't
quite practical but it was discussed[1] that this won't change.
The bindings specifies verbose information for the devices, but
it doesn't fit in the I2C ID's 20 characters
On Wed, Oct 01, 2008 at 03:39:48PM +0400, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
[...]
Any issues with this or the second patch? Can we merge them?
I do not have the time to review these patches (and, honestly, have no
interest in them.) So I will not merge them but I have no objection to
them being
On Mon, Oct 06, 2008 at 09:28:31PM +0400, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
On Wed, Oct 01, 2008 at 03:39:48PM +0400, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
[...]
Any issues with this or the second patch? Can we merge them?
I do not have the time to review these patches (and, honestly, have no
interest in
On Mon, Oct 06, 2008 at 11:31:58AM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
On Mon, Oct 06, 2008 at 09:28:31PM +0400, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
On Wed, Oct 01, 2008 at 03:39:48PM +0400, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
[...]
Any issues with this or the second patch? Can we merge them?
I do not have the
Hi Anton,
On Tue, 30 Sep 2008 16:44:24 +0400, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 06:12:19PM +0400, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
of/base.c matches on the first (most specific) entries, which isn't
quite practical but it was discussed[1] that this won't change.
The bindings
On Wed, Oct 01, 2008 at 01:22:48PM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote:
Hi Anton,
On Tue, 30 Sep 2008 16:44:24 +0400, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 06:12:19PM +0400, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
of/base.c matches on the first (most specific) entries, which isn't
quite practical but it
On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 06:12:19PM +0400, Anton Vorontsov wrote:
of/base.c matches on the first (most specific) entries, which isn't
quite practical but it was discussed[1] that this won't change.
The bindings specifies verbose information for the devices, but
it doesn't fit in the I2C ID's
of/base.c matches on the first (most specific) entries, which isn't
quite practical but it was discussed[1] that this won't change.
The bindings specifies verbose information for the devices, but
it doesn't fit in the I2C ID's 20 characters limit. The limit won't
change[2], and the bindings won't
