From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johan Hovold Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2 v2] HID: leds: Use attribute-groups in MSI GT683R driver Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 12:47:44 +0200 Message-ID: <20140630104744.GB2486@localhost> References: <20140625115541.GA1409@localhost> <1403711966-13003-1-git-send-email-janne.kanniainen@gmail.com> <20140625174109.GE1409@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-leds-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Bryan Wu Cc: Jiri Kosina , Johan Hovold , Janne Kanniainen , Greg Kroah-Hartman , =?iso-8859-1?Q?Bj=F8rn?= Mork , lkml , Linux LED Subsystem , linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-input@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-input@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 03:55:10PM -0700, Bryan Wu wrote: > On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 12:09 PM, Jiri Kosina wrote: > > On Wed, 25 Jun 2014, Johan Hovold wrote: > > > >> Did you see the attribute-race series I posted? Not sure how best to > >> handle the dependency, as those patches should probably go in through > >> the LEDs tree, while the first patch in that series (adding the groups > >> field) is a dependency for this patch. > >> > >> Jiri, how would this best be solved? > > > > I think the best course of action here is to gather Acks from the > > respective maintainers, and take the whole lot trough a single tree > > (probably the leds tree in this case) to avoid unnecessary intra-tree > > dependencies in a rather straighforward situation like this. > > I think the better place is HID/input tree, since this patch depends > on the initial one which is not in my tree. > I'm going to merge Johan's whole patchset and this patch probably > depends Johan's work too. Dmitry has ACKed the input-patch and Bryan has applied that one and the leds-patches to his tree (of which the first one is a dependency of this patch). Jiri, are you saying that the gt683r-driver should go in through his tree as well, that is all three patches including the first that you have already applied? I just assumed your for-next branch was immutable, but perhaps I was mistaken. Thanks, Johan