From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mail-pa0-x232.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400e:c03::232])
 by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.85 #2 (Red Hat Linux))
 id 1ZhPF8-0004ra-KI
 for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 21:48:55 +0000
Received: by padhy16 with SMTP id hy16so52046576pad.1
 for <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 14:48:32 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 14:48:30 -0700
From: Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>
To: Vladimir Zapolskiy <vz@mleia.com>
Cc: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org,
 Roland Stigge <stigge@antcom.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] mtd: nand: lpc32xx_slc: fix calculation of timing
 arcs from given values
Message-ID: <20150930214830.GN143959@google.com>
References: <1443458338-23552-1-git-send-email-vz@mleia.com>
 <20150930211253.GK143959@google.com>
 <20150930211358.GL143959@google.com> <560C5718.2070603@mleia.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <560C5718.2070603@mleia.com>
List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list <linux-mtd.lists.infradead.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/options/linux-mtd>,
 <mailto:linux-mtd-request@lists.infradead.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/>
List-Post: <mailto:linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linux-mtd-request@lists.infradead.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mtd>,
 <mailto:linux-mtd-request@lists.infradead.org?subject=subscribe>

On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 12:41:44AM +0300, Vladimir Zapolskiy wrote:
> On 01.10.2015 00:13, Brian Norris wrote:
> > (snip patch)
> > 
> > Also, why [PATCH 1/5]? I don't see the other 4.
> > 
> 
> Sorry for confusion, this is a leftover from my local series of various
> fixes, only this one patch is addressed to MTD. If you want, I can
> resend the change removing 1/5.

Eh, no big deal. Just need to make sure I'm not missing things (e.g.,
caught in spam filters). But in the future, independent changes
(especially when not sent to the same recipients) probably work better
when sent standalone.