From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B10A9CD5BC8 for ; Tue, 26 May 2026 18:46:05 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To: From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=5ngCoUCdLUTbdrymHOsCev6X6hH5iQoI3DmGS6ubV2s=; b=zekaBUurAJp6dGeflsFwoFcFGk HFUzvf4wTr35fmvqPQ/3+/YKRv0TlGRFJcgDwrt9U+cZjopEpDc3mBsIqGz400lalzS1c02eu5jQU BR7B8uc/rCKKZ1+7RG4uG4CrnC31idAbmVWBOuvWl6Ak70vs77PyYpBDgjhdHAqL23+OkAXSOzmHL vV3CZG14DfL468LACa4nm0Fp/F3oW7zhu9ZIoAtDaCNKYym3T3HWu+jJR90ayJCdQCEH7FUisM1Wx f0yVRY9k7P2+6OD/ub1Jp3n2ASu3iFl1JxIKzuWnCc7p+upUE+3BZipx05zwz+BS1vHgnDWqYRpGK R+sP7aaw==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.99.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1wRwGn-00000002pfT-3yxN; Tue, 26 May 2026 18:12:49 +0000 Received: from tor.source.kernel.org ([2600:3c04:e001:324:0:1991:8:25]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.99.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1wRwGn-00000002pf5-07sh for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 26 May 2026 18:12:49 +0000 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (quasi.space.kernel.org [100.103.45.18]) by tor.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA36460018; Tue, 26 May 2026 18:12:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6C74F1F000E9; Tue, 26 May 2026 18:12:40 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1779819167; bh=5ngCoUCdLUTbdrymHOsCev6X6hH5iQoI3DmGS6ubV2s=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=j/tm/PMK6+xds8mCajlHkpjxIdln5XEF/6vMWcOztxsauj1YR3ATmxVMine3MbaIr 18ADqFnZ5vyMr3g2fI2ATHMYtCdy6BpHvi3j6IqhI0isnTMraXyFLlQyOaeDiDCo2X gf1tys8RZWGoVuqNvkA4fesqF1kf6vFx/4mS1N2ATGABncvcZPrLCFwzynRAb1Yv10 wNnQW7AQFUY6vBX6t9C38qNM+9ouImx91LGPOKrQRb9Uha1kyyPzncAClj2O77Pkc1 BwaSViJRG/pCvr8LOwbOfuanKixf9gGBp4LquqcbtG+ToBhBdML4N2BbF8SnontwTb +23XpWM/w0rrg== Date: Tue, 26 May 2026 19:12:35 +0100 From: Jonathan Cameron To: David Lechner Cc: Jyoti Bhayana , Nuno =?UTF-8?B?U8Oh?= , Andy Shevchenko , Nicolas Ferre , Alexandre Belloni , Claudiu Beznea , Maxime Coquelin , Alexandre Torgue , Benson Leung , Guenter Roeck , linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com, chrome-platform@lists.linux.dev, Andy Shevchenko Subject: Re: [PATCH] iio: pressure: cros_ec_baro: simplify timestamp channel definition Message-ID: <20260526191235.0a01be62@jic23-huawei> In-Reply-To: <3c12da03-6c62-4045-b831-e7b07c0ecb5d@baylibre.com> References: <20260525014654.2399354-1-dlechner@baylibre.com> <3c12da03-6c62-4045-b831-e7b07c0ecb5d@baylibre.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.4.0 (GTK 3.24.52; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Sun, 24 May 2026 20:49:11 -0500 David Lechner wrote: > On 5/24/26 8:46 PM, David Lechner wrote: > > Use IIO_CHAN_SOFT_TIMESTAMP() to define the timestamp channel instead of > > manually filling in the struct iio_chan_spec fields. This makes the code > > less verbose and mistake-prone. > > > FYI, there was a server error when doing b4 send, so this last patch > didn't get sent with the rest. I missed the [PATCH v2 9/9] when editing > it manually to send again. > > New and exciting way to confuse b4 :) Anyhow easy to work around with a -v 2 for the first lot and then it thinks this one is v3 anyway. Applied. Thanks, Jonathan