From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andy Shevchenko Subject: Re: Designware patches Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2016 20:33:22 +0300 Message-ID: <1466357602.30123.169.camel@linux.intel.com> References: <20160619170800.GB2933@tetsubishi> <1466356591.30123.167.camel@linux.intel.com> <20160619173034.GF2933@tetsubishi> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:29800 "EHLO mga11.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751191AbcFSRdv (ORCPT ); Sun, 19 Jun 2016 13:33:51 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20160619173034.GF2933@tetsubishi> Sender: linux-i2c-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org To: Wolfram Sang Cc: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, Jarkko Nikula , Mika Westerberg , Ulf Hansson On Sun, 2016-06-19 at 19:30 +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > > > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/linux- > > > i2c/list/?submitter=&state=&q=design&archive=&delegate= > > > > Wow, there is a couple from ancient times! > > We can skip the one from 2013 :) And I missed the ack for the 2015 > one, > will apply it now. I assume that Jarkko's patches we should review or comment, but I don't remember if it was the case that time. > > > > > > > > > I'd suggest I apply patches whenever they get acked- or rev-by > > > tags. > > > Or > > > drop them when someone says so in a reply to the patch. Does that > > > sound > > > like a plan? > > > > My patches can't be applied since it touches PCI part. > > I assume s/can't/can/ here and that True > > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/610444/ > > is obsolete meanwhile then? Looks so wrt Jarkko's comment. -- Andy Shevchenko Intel Finland Oy