From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mika Westerberg Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] i2c / ACPI: Do not touch an I2C device if it belongs to another adapter Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2016 12:25:08 +0300 Message-ID: <20160922092508.GJ1218@lahna.fi.intel.com> References: <874m5ax3o4.fsf@gmail.com> <20160920135925.45450-1-mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com> <20160921054834.GC1484@katana> <20160921084502.GV1811@lahna.fi.intel.com> <20160921161435.GA1432@katana> <20160922084930.GI1218@lahna.fi.intel.com> <20160922085924.GB1433@katana> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:44066 "EHLO mga01.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753183AbcIVJZV (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Sep 2016 05:25:21 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160922085924.GB1433@katana> Sender: linux-i2c-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org To: Wolfram Sang Cc: Nicolai Stange , Octavian Purdila , "Rafael J . Wysocki" , Jarkko Nikula , linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 10:59:24AM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > > Huh? It doesn't apply on top of rc7 here? What did you base it on? > > > > It is based on linux-next as it is on top of Jarkko's I2C ACPI namespace > > cleanup patches. I'm wondering if I make an updated patch on top of > > v4.8-rc7 does it conflict with the I2C stuff in linux-next? What's your > > preference? > > I see. I'll add it to for-next, then. If someone wants it backported, it > needs to be rewritten and re-tested. OK, thanks.