From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: S3C64XX: Fix build of Cragganmore after SPI changes Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2011 02:02:56 +0000 Message-ID: <20111230020256.GD9737@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> References: <1325073936-10936-1-git-send-email-broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <02cb01ccc696$c0088680$40199380$%kim@samsung.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from opensource.wolfsonmicro.com ([80.75.67.52]:38397 "EHLO opensource.wolfsonmicro.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754713Ab1L3CC7 (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Dec 2011 21:02:59 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <02cb01ccc696$c0088680$40199380$%kim@samsung.com> Sender: linux-samsung-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org To: Kukjin Kim Cc: 'Padmavathi Venna' , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, patches@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 11:00:05AM +0900, Kukjin Kim wrote: > I couldn't look at the line of 's3c64xx_spi_set_info(...);' which is deleted > in this patch in my tree. So I couldn't apply this. > Do you want to apply this just to add 's3c64xx_spi0_set_platdata()'? No, I think this is a case of me noticing a problem in a patch I thought was already upstream (and pushed later in the day). Sorry for the noise. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com (Mark Brown) Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2011 02:02:56 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] ARM: S3C64XX: Fix build of Cragganmore after SPI changes In-Reply-To: <02cb01ccc696$c0088680$40199380$%kim@samsung.com> References: <1325073936-10936-1-git-send-email-broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <02cb01ccc696$c0088680$40199380$%kim@samsung.com> Message-ID: <20111230020256.GD9737@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 11:00:05AM +0900, Kukjin Kim wrote: > I couldn't look at the line of 's3c64xx_spi_set_info(...);' which is deleted > in this patch in my tree. So I couldn't apply this. > Do you want to apply this just to add 's3c64xx_spi0_set_platdata()'? No, I think this is a case of me noticing a problem in a patch I thought was already upstream (and pushed later in the day). Sorry for the noise.