From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lee Jones Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/8] mfd: Add OF device table to I2C drivers that are missing it Date: Thu, 4 May 2017 12:50:16 +0100 Message-ID: <20170504115016.ayrgbqdshdvnop6k@dell> References: <20170504052107.18995-1-javier@dowhile0.org> <20170504080931.GA1487@katana> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170504080931.GA1487@katana> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Wolfram Sang Cc: Javier Martinez Canillas , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Rob Herring , Tony Lindgren , Aaro Koskinen List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 04 May 2017, Wolfram Sang wrote: > thanks for the series. > > > Most patches can be applied independently, with the exception of patches > > 2 to 4 that should be applied in the same tree to keep bisect-ability. I > > suggest these to go through the MFD subsystem tree. > > From my POV, patches 2-5 should be applied to the same tree. Since all > I2C related patches have my tag, I assume they will be picked up by MFD. > Lee, let me know if you prefer differently. I can pick them up, no problem. Can the ARM patches be taking independently? I'm guessing they can since they are separate from one another. -- Lee Jones Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog