On 4 May 2016 at 14:09, Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org wrote:
Hi Stephen,
On 4 May 2016 at 14:02, Stephen Warren swarren@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
On 05/04/2016 01:48 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
+Tom Rini
Hi Stephen,
On 4 May 2016 at 13:46, Stephen Warren swarren@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
On 05/04/2016 01:31 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
Hi Stephen,
On 4 May 2016 at 12:57, Stephen Warren swarren@wwwdotorg.org wrote:
On 04/19/2016 04:19 PM, Stephen Warren wrote: > > > > From: Stephen Warren swarren@nvidia.com > > In some cases, drivers may not want to bind to a device. Allow bind() > to > return -ENODEV in this case, and don't treat this as an error. This > can > be useful in situations where some information source other than the > DT > node's main status property indicates whether the device should be > enabled, for example other DT properties might indicate this, or the > driver might query non-DT sources such as system fuses or a version > number > register.
Simon, this series is assigned to you in patchwork. Are you the right person to apply it?
Yes. but not for this release, right?
Patch 2 in the series (which depends on this patch) fixes a bug for Tegra boards with LCD panels. Admittedly it appears to be only cosmetic (an error message is printed at boot), but "it's a bug" seems to satisfy the requirement to apply it for this release.
Sorry, I didn't know that. Given the core nature of this patch I would rather wait, and apply it next week. Let me know if you disagree.
I suppose that it's been broken long enough that another release won't matter.
Was my explanation of the bug in the description of patch 2/2 not clear in some way?
Looks good to me. Were you expecting me to apply both as a bug fix? If so I'd prefer to have Tom Warren's ACK. Even so, a core patch like this really needs the full test cycle IMO.
Regards, Simon
Applied to u-boot-dm, thanks!