From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Wolfram Sang Subject: Re: remove_clientdata_to_null-branch Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 20:22:07 +0200 Message-ID: <20100403182207.GC2190@pengutronix.de> References: <20100403173646.GB2190@pengutronix.de> <20100403201317.1321b414@hyperion.delvare> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="vEao7xgI/oilGqZ+" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100403201317.1321b414-ig7AzVSIIG7kN2dkZ6Wm7A@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-i2c-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Jean Delvare Cc: linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org --vEao7xgI/oilGqZ+ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > I've seen it, but it is something for the power subsystem maintainer > (or akpm if there is none) to apply. I did kill drivers/i2c/chips for a > reason. Oops, sorry my failure then. I asked Anton Vorontsov (power-maintainer) if = he is fine with going this via the i2c-tree, so it will surely come after the needed modification of the core. That is why he "only" acked it. (I still t= hink this sounds reasonable, the other cleaning-up patch should also go via i2c, right? Or am I missing something?) Regards, Wolfram --=20 Pengutronix e.K. | Wolfram Sang | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | --vEao7xgI/oilGqZ+ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAku3h08ACgkQD27XaX1/VRuGtgCfZGCjjAv5kUqNY8f6EA6m5tLB FQcAnAnUAwa5/Cm9mCE9ntRlJJiPRcp5 =i6Un -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --vEao7xgI/oilGqZ+--