From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Mon, 21 Jan 2013 10:41:29 +0100 (CET) Received: from mms1.broadcom.com ([216.31.210.17]:3696 "EHLO mms1.broadcom.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by eddie.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S6823732Ab3AUJl153GnU (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Jan 2013 10:41:27 +0100 Received: from [10.9.208.26] by mms1.broadcom.com with ESMTP (Broadcom SMTP Relay (Email Firewall v6.5)); Mon, 21 Jan 2013 01:38:57 -0800 X-Server-Uuid: 06151B78-6688-425E-9DE2-57CB27892261 Received: from mail-irva-13.broadcom.com (10.11.16.103) by IRVEXCHCAS05.corp.ad.broadcom.com (10.9.208.26) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.355.2; Mon, 21 Jan 2013 01:40:59 -0800 Received: from [10.176.68.30] (unknown [10.176.68.30]) by mail-irva-13.broadcom.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCA8340FE4; Mon, 21 Jan 2013 01:40:57 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <50FD0D28.8070905@broadcom.com> Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 10:40:56 +0100 From: "Arend van Spriel" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130106 Thunderbird/17.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Ralf Baechle" cc: "Sergei Shtylyov" , linux-mips@linux-mips.org, "Hauke Mehrtens" Subject: Re: [PATCH] mips: bcm47xx: select GPIOLIB for BCMA on bcm47xx platform References: <1357323005-28008-1-git-send-email-arend@broadcom.com> <50E80F78.9030901@mvista.com> <50E9E914.9030900@broadcom.com> <20130116145000.GD26569@linux-mips.org> In-Reply-To: <20130116145000.GD26569@linux-mips.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.6 X-WSS-ID: 7CE3D33B1Z4102130-01-01 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-archive-position: 35501 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: arend@broadcom.com Precedence: bulk List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0 List-Id: linux-mips X-List-ID: linux-mips List-subscribe: List-owner: List-post: List-archive: X-list: linux-mips Return-Path: On 01/16/2013 03:50 PM, Ralf Baechle wrote: > On Sun, Jan 06, 2013 at 10:13:56PM +0100, Arend van Spriel wrote: > >>> This change doesn';t seem to be documented in your changelog. Maybe >>> it's worth another patch? >>> >>> WBR, Sergei >>> >> >> Very observant. ;-) Yes. After fixing the other ones I got a warning on >> that one. I could resubmit the change with a more generic description or >> split it up as you suggest. >> >> Ralf, >> >> Please advice. > > For simplicity's sake I'm going to split this myself BUT putting changes > that are not explained in changelog comments is a good way to get your > dear maintainer grumpy :) Thanks, Ralf Appreciated. Hope you can keep that smile ;-) Regards, Arend > Ralf >