Re: [PATCH v2] tps65910: Work around silicon erratum SWCZ010

[Arnout Vandecappelle <arnout@mind.be>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1284 bytes --]

On 08/26/14 11:46, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 10:25:21AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
>> On Fri, 22 Aug 2014, Mark Brown wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 05:30:56PM +0200, Arnout Vandecappelle (Essensium/Mind) wrote:
>>>> From http://www.ti.com/lit/pdf/SWCZ010 :
>>>>
>>>> Glitch on SDA-SCL not managed correctly by the I2C IP
> 
>>  drivers/mfd/tps65910.c | 5 +++++
>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> 
>>> Applied, thanks.
> 
>> Eh?
> 
> So, this is an example of why it's important to both use subject lines
> matching the pattern for the subsystem and try to select CC lists
> sensibly.  I've dropped the patch.

 So, what is the proper subsystem in this case? mfd?

 Should I repost with the subsystem in the subject?

 BTW, while I'm asking questions: is this something that should be sent to stable?

 Regards,
 Arnout


-- 
Arnout Vandecappelle                          arnout at mind be
Senior Embedded Software Architect            +32-16-286500
Essensium/Mind                                http://www.mind.be
G.Geenslaan 9, 3001 Leuven, Belgium           BE 872 984 063 RPR Leuven
LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/arnoutvandecappelle
GPG fingerprint:  7CB5 E4CC 6C2E EFD4 6E3D A754 F963 ECAB 2450 2F1F


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]