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