From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751056AbcABJSC (ORCPT ); Sat, 2 Jan 2016 04:18:02 -0500 Received: from smtp48.i.mail.ru ([94.100.177.108]:34692 "EHLO smtp48.i.mail.ru" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750749AbcABJR6 convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Sat, 2 Jan 2016 04:17:58 -0500 X-Greylist: delayed 56409 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Sat, 02 Jan 2016 04:17:57 EST Date: Sat, 2 Jan 2016 12:12:39 +0300 From: Roman Volkov To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Mark Rutland , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Russell King , Pawel Moll , linux+armsoc@arm.linux.org.uk, Ian Campbell , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, Tony Prisk , Rob Herring , arm@kernel.org, Alexey Charkov , Roman Volkov , Kumar Gala Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 RESEND 0/2] WM8505/WM8650 DT fixes for SD card controller Message-ID: <20160102121239.01b64a0c@v1ron-s7> In-Reply-To: <9863929.DgKyDlgJ1e@wuerfel> References: <1451655492-2569-1-git-send-email-v1ron@mail.ru> <7786478.TezhYjHkEF@wuerfel> <20160101203230.1dc5e655@v1ron-s7> <9863929.DgKyDlgJ1e@wuerfel> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.13.1 (GTK+ 2.24.29; x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT X-Mras: Ok Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org В Fri, 01 Jan 2016 22:53:33 +0100 Arnd Bergmann пишет: > On Friday 01 January 2016 20:32:30 Roman Volkov wrote: > > > Applied both to next/dt, thanks a lot for following up! > > > > > > Let me know if you think this should go into stable backports as > > > well, I did not apply it to the fixes branch as you don't have a > > > 'Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org' tag and it has never worked so far. > > > > Yes, this must go into the stable too. Let me know if I must change > > something or resend. > > I can put them in the fixes branch with the appropriate stable > tag myself, but please clarify whether we need just the first or > both patches there. It looks to me that the second one while > correct only addresses a cosmetic problem and everything works > without it. Correct, everything works without the second one. One of reviewers noticed that addresses are different between WM8505 and WM8650 where the hardware is the same. If such trivial changes are not accepted, please do not apply. Happy New Year, Roman