From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Cousson, Benoit" Subject: Re: [PATCH 2 14/18] I2C: OMAP1/OMAP2+: create omap I2C functionality flags for each cpu_... test Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 16:56:17 +0100 Message-ID: <4D77A321.4070804@ti.com> References: <20110308105934.23531.83540.stgit@otae.warmcat.com> <20110308110904.23531.66727.stgit@otae.warmcat.com> <4D779A33.9070905@linaro.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from comal.ext.ti.com ([198.47.26.152]:56403 "EHLO comal.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757069Ab1CIP4k (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Mar 2011 10:56:40 -0500 In-Reply-To: <4D779A33.9070905@linaro.org> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: "andy.green@linaro.org" Cc: Andy Green , "Krishnamoorthy, Balaji T" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" , "patches@linaro.org" , Ben Dooks On 3/9/2011 4:18 PM, Andy Green wrote: > On 03/09/2011 02:31 PM, Somebody in the thread at some point said: > > Hi - > >> Minor comment, Can you use >> BIT(0) for 1, BIT(1) for 2 ... BIT (8) for 0x100 > > OK, I agree it will be nicer. Thanks for the comment. > > I guess I can just change this and issue just this guy as try 3 rather > than sending the whole series mostly unchanged. In that case, I'll take > care of Benoit's member re-ordering to match the scripts at the same > time and issue that guy as try 3 as well. It is up to Ben, but maybe it will be less confusing to re-send the whole series, since you have at least two patches to update. Maybe, just wait a little bit in case someone else has something to say about this series. Benoit