From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756858Ab1KPRBd (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Nov 2011 12:01:33 -0500 Received: from smtp-out-055.synserver.de ([212.40.185.55]:1303 "HELO smtp-out-054.synserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1756122Ab1KPRBc (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Nov 2011 12:01:32 -0500 X-SynServer-TrustedSrc: 1 X-SynServer-AuthUser: lars@metafoo.de X-SynServer-PPID: 9252 Message-ID: <4EC3EC74.9040706@metafoo.de> Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 18:01:40 +0100 From: Lars-Peter Clausen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.23) Gecko/20111010 Iceowl/1.0b2 Icedove/3.1.15 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Brown CC: Dimitris Papastamos , Jonathan Cameron , Michael Hennerich , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, device-drivers-devel@blackfin.uclinux.org, drivers@analog.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] regmap: Make reg_config reg_defaults const References: <1321457302-8724-1-git-send-email-lars@metafoo.de> <1321457302-8724-2-git-send-email-lars@metafoo.de> <20111116161316.GI29986@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <4EC3E385.4060006@metafoo.de> <20111116162442.GL29986@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <4EC3E684.90109@metafoo.de> <20111116163908.GN29986@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> <4EC3E9E5.7030909@metafoo.de> <20111116165151.GO29986@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> In-Reply-To: <20111116165151.GO29986@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 11/16/2011 05:51 PM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 05:50:45PM +0100, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote: > >> Hu? which patches did you apply? If I have regmap/for-next plus patch 1 and >> patch 2 of this series there isn't even a reference to reg_defaults in regmap.c > > None of them, I just changed the code to make the defaults const - I'm > just reviewing by eyeball as I'm well aware of the fact that this isn't > const. So you only applied part of the patch and are complaining that it you get an error?