From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S932752AbcGDJGe (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Mon, 4 Jul 2016 05:06:34 -0400
Received: from down.free-electrons.com ([37.187.137.238]:33634 "EHLO
	mail.free-electrons.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1753363AbcGDJFI (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 4 Jul 2016 05:05:08 -0400
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2016 11:05:04 +0200
From: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>,
        Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
        Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>,
        Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>,
        "open list:ARM/Rockchip SoC..." <linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org>,
        Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>, Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: pwm: Fix regulator ramp delay for continuous
 mode
Message-ID: <20160704110504.10a15c1c@bbrezillon>
In-Reply-To: <20160704085336.GT6247@sirena.org.uk>
References: <1467089591-7631-1-git-send-email-dianders@chromium.org>
	<20160701080614.GA9196@sirena.org.uk>
	<CAD=FV=WKR_Fq6o34886RCY-T-6AKdRqFz9H1aTiRq7Zu=o8TWA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20160702174752.7e893ac2@bbrezillon>
	<20160704085336.GT6247@sirena.org.uk>
Organization: Free Electrons
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.13.2 (GTK+ 2.24.30; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Hi Mark,

On Mon, 4 Jul 2016 10:53:36 +0200
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote:

> On Sat, Jul 02, 2016 at 05:47:52PM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> 
> > I'm waiting for reviews or acks. AFAIR, I addressed all the comments
> > Thierry made on my v2, so I guess we're good on the PWM side, but that
> > would be good to have a review from Mark now that we agreed on the PWM
> > APIs.  
> 
> I've already have one round of review invalidated by changes in the PWM
> bits so I've been deprioritising it until it's clear that the churn
> there has stopped.  I understand things are supposed to be quieting down
> but I also have a bunch of other things to look at...

I understand, but can we still expect to have it in 4.8 (I mean,
assuming Thierry is okay taking the first 2 patching for 4.8 too)?

Thanks,

Boris