From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2018 11:48:09 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] i2c: aspeed: Acknowledge most interrupts early in
 interrupt handler
In-Reply-To: <037b4cf8-5dfa-d554-b126-a2462ba9c803@linux.intel.com>
References: <1536895810-28903-1-git-send-email-linux@roeck-us.net>
 <fbf54ca6-16b3-5e35-eac8-b3dab8118543@linux.intel.com>
 <20180917163401.GA1082@kunai>
 <037b4cf8-5dfa-d554-b126-a2462ba9c803@linux.intel.com>
Message-ID: <20180917184809.GA16057@roeck-us.net>
List-Id: <linux-aspeed.lists.ozlabs.org>
To: linux-aspeed@lists.ozlabs.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Mon, Sep 17, 2018 at 10:16:59AM -0700, Jae Hyun Yoo wrote:
> On 9/17/2018 9:34 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> >
> >>Looks good to me. Thanks! :)
> >>
> >>Acked-by: Jae Hyun Yoo <jae.hyun.yoo@linux.intel.com>
> >
> >Does that mean I need to revert "[PATCH i2c-next v6] i2c: aspeed: Handle
> >master/slave combined irq events properly" in i2c/for-next? And apply
> >this to i2c/for-current?
> >
> 
> No need to revert "[PATCH i2c-next v6] i2c: aspeed: Handle master/slave
> combined irq events properly". This patch should be applied on top of
> the patch.
> 
Yes, sorry, I should have tagged the patch as for-next.

Guenter