From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman Date: Sat, 24 May 2014 20:05:00 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: imx: introduce function imx_free_mx3_camera Message-Id: <20140524200500.GB1023@kroah.com> List-Id: References: <1400781080-6117-1-git-send-email-emilgoode@gmail.com> <20140522181024.GA20155@pengutronix.de> <20140524152200.GA4666@lianli> In-Reply-To: <20140524152200.GA4666@lianli> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 05:22:00PM +0200, Emil Goode wrote: > Hello Uwe and Greg, > > > You'd do a better deed if you picked up > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1613364/focus35995 > > Since there is nothing wrong with the last version of the patch in > the above thread, I feel strange about picking it up and just splitting > it into two patches. However it would be good to have it applied. > > I think the reason why the author didn't resend is that the object file > and data structure layout information in the changelog depend on the > changes to both .name and .dma_mask and by splitting the patch this > information would not apply to any one of the resulting two patches. > > Perhaps keeping this information in the changelog is a good reason for > applying the patch as it is? If you read the thread, I explained why I didn't want to take the patch as-is. Please feel free to break it up as asked for and I'll be glad to consider it then. thanks, greg k-h