From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paul Bolle Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 3/3] scsi: ufs-qcom: update configuration option of SCSI_UFS_QCOM component Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 12:14:26 +0200 Message-ID: <1432203266.21715.148.camel@x220> References: <1432043231-31102-1-git-send-email-ygardi@codeaurora.org> <1432043231-31102-4-git-send-email-ygardi@codeaurora.org> <1432106479.21715.33.camel@x220> <1432110155.21715.45.camel@x220> <1432192570.21715.107.camel@x220> <13293a67c19b0c18d2c99386dcf159ea.squirrel@www.codeaurora.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <13293a67c19b0c18d2c99386dcf159ea.squirrel@www.codeaurora.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: ygardi@codeaurora.org Cc: james.bottomley@hansenpartnership.com, kishon@ti.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, santoshsy@gmail.com, linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org, subhashj@codeaurora.org, gbroner@codeaurora.org, dovl@codeaurora.org, Vinayak Holikatti , "James E.J. Bottomley" List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2015-05-21 at 10:09 +0000, ygardi@codeaurora.org wrote: > > On Wed, 2015-05-20 at 10:22 +0200, Paul Bolle wrote: > > Am I missing something obvious here? Because ufs-qcom currently looks > > pointless to me, and I actually see little reason to even have it in the > > mainline tree. > > > > we haven't uploaded yet the patch that binds qcom vops to the driver, but > we will soon. Perhaps you could make that patch part of v2 of this series. I see little point in this series without that patch. Perhaps someone else still cares about it, but I'm not looking at it anymore. Thanks, Paul Bolle