From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lee Jones Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 5/8] mfd: db8500-prcmu: Use cpufreq_for_each_entry macro for iteration Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 12:29:13 +0100 Message-ID: <20140422112913.GB21613@lee--X1> References: <535635d0.8908b40a.6c36.ffffaaa9SMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING@mx.google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Received: from mail-wi0-f175.google.com ([209.85.212.175]:52894 "EHLO mail-wi0-f175.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755833AbaDVL3a (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Apr 2014 07:29:30 -0400 Received: by mail-wi0-f175.google.com with SMTP id cc10so3081255wib.2 for ; Tue, 22 Apr 2014 04:29:29 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <535635d0.8908b40a.6c36.ffffaaa9SMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING@mx.google.com> Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org To: Stratos Karafotis Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linus Walleij , " linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Samuel Ortiz , Viresh Kumar , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org > > > The cpufreq core now supports the cpufreq_for_each_entry macro he= lper=20 > > > for iteration over the cpufreq_frequency_table, so use it.=20 > > >=20 > > > It should have no functional changes.=20 > > > > > Signed-off-by: Stratos Karafotis =20 > > > ---=20 > > > > It would be good to have a changelog which describes the difference= s=20 > > between the versions, so we can keep track.=20 > > > > >=C2=A0 drivers/mfd/db8500-prcmu.c | 19 ++++++++-----------=20 > > >=C2=A0 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)=20 > > > > So it looks like I already applied v2 of this patch to my tree. Wha= t=20 > > changed in v3 and v4? Should I remove that patch from MFD and apply= =20 > > this one instead? >=20 > I'm sorry for the confusion. > I sent v3 only for patches 1/8 and 3/8. > So, I was asked by Rafael to resend the entire series as v4 > in order to be clear which is the latest version in each patch. > Unfortunately, I omit the change log :( >=20 > The specific patch (5/8) is unchanged since v2. >=20 > I'm sorry for the inconvenience. That's okay, thanks for clarifying. --=20 Lee Jones Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead Linaro.org =E2=94=82 Open source software for ARM SoCs =46ollow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog