From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: thierry.reding@gmail.com (Thierry Reding) Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 12:33:45 +0200 Subject: [PATCH v8 4/9] pwm: pwm-tiecap: Update dt binding document to use proper unit address In-Reply-To: <20160711100629.GJ5823@ulmo.ba.sec> References: <1462291015-1919-1-git-send-email-fcooper@ti.com> <1462291015-1919-5-git-send-email-fcooper@ti.com> <20160711095623.GI5823@ulmo.ba.sec> <20160711100629.GJ5823@ulmo.ba.sec> Message-ID: <20160711103345.GB5503@ulmo.ba.sec> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 12:06:29PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote: > On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 11:56:23AM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote: > > On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 10:56:50AM -0500, Franklin S Cooper Jr wrote: > > > Replace unit address from 0 to the proper physical address. Also insure > > > that the unit address matches the reg property address. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Franklin S Cooper Jr > > > --- > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/pwm-tiecap.txt | 8 ++++---- > > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > I applied this long ago but never let you know: Applied, thanks. > > Actually I didn't. And it seems the reason is that it doesn't apply > cleanly. For some reason my tree doesn't have an entry for the ecap > example on am437x. Am I missing a patch? Can you resend whatever is > not in linux-next yet? Oh, nevermind my blabbering, it took me too long to realize that this is the series that Tony had picked up for the most part, and I hadn't properly marked it done in patchwork. I'll go get some coffee now. Thierry -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: not available URL: