Re: [alsa-devel] [PATCH] ASoC: mc13783: Add devicetree support
This patch adds devicetree support for mc13783-codec.
Applied, thanks.
No Mark, no!
What a problem, Lee?
There's no problem with the patch, don't worry.
Neither Mark, nor I can apply this patch independently, we need to create a shared branch somewhere, or we'll risk conflicts at merge time.
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 03:17:08PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
Neither Mark, nor I can apply this patch independently, we need to create a shared branch somewhere, or we'll risk conflicts at merge time.
You acked it without saying you didn't want me to apply it... usually that means someone is OK with things getting applied. In any case, as ever it's on a branch by itself so you can pull it in easily. I just tagged it.
The following changes since commit c9eaa447e77efe77b7fa4c953bd62de8297fd6c5:
Linux 3.15-rc1 (2014-04-13 14:18:35 -0700)
are available in the git repository at:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/sound.git tags/mc13783-asoc
for you to fetch changes up to 780aaeff96819ca58e0cad830bfbe6eee9aef82c:
ASoC: mc13783: Add devicetree support (2014-04-29 15:24:54 -0700)
---------------------------------------------------------------- ASoC: mc13783 DT support
Tagged since it updates the MFD as well.
---------------------------------------------------------------- Alexander Shiyan (1): ASoC: mc13783: Add devicetree support
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/mc13xxx.txt | 3 +++ drivers/mfd/mc13xxx-core.c | 10 +++++++--- sound/soc/codecs/mc13783.c | 14 +++++++++++++- 3 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
On Wed, 30 Apr 2014, Mark Brown wrote:
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 03:17:08PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
Neither Mark, nor I can apply this patch independently, we need to create a shared branch somewhere, or we'll risk conflicts at merge time.
You acked it without saying you didn't want me to apply it... usually that means someone is OK with things getting applied.
Actually, that's not true:
MFD changes look sensible: Acked-by: Lee Jones lee.jones@linaro.org
I'm happy to create a shared branch if required. <-----###
In any case, as ever it's on a branch by itself so you can pull it in easily. I just tagged it.
Very well, thanks.
The following changes since commit c9eaa447e77efe77b7fa4c953bd62de8297fd6c5:
Linux 3.15-rc1 (2014-04-13 14:18:35 -0700)
are available in the git repository at:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/sound.git tags/mc13783-asoc
for you to fetch changes up to 780aaeff96819ca58e0cad830bfbe6eee9aef82c:
ASoC: mc13783: Add devicetree support (2014-04-29 15:24:54 -0700)
ASoC: mc13783 DT support
Tagged since it updates the MFD as well.
Alexander Shiyan (1): ASoC: mc13783: Add devicetree support
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/mc13xxx.txt | 3 +++ drivers/mfd/mc13xxx-core.c | 10 +++++++--- sound/soc/codecs/mc13783.c | 14 +++++++++++++- 3 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
On Thu, May 01, 2014 at 08:42:53AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
You acked it without saying you didn't want me to apply it... usually that means someone is OK with things getting applied.
Actually, that's not true:
MFD changes look sensible: Acked-by: Lee Jones lee.jones@linaro.org
I'm happy to create a shared branch if required. <-----###
Sure, but I didn't see an urgent need for that immediately so I just went ahead - the ack usually means that it's OK to apply.
On Thu, 01 May 2014, Mark Brown wrote:
On Thu, May 01, 2014 at 08:42:53AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
You acked it without saying you didn't want me to apply it... usually that means someone is OK with things getting applied.
Actually, that's not true:
MFD changes look sensible: Acked-by: Lee Jones lee.jones@linaro.org
I'm happy to create a shared branch if required. <-----###
Sure, but I didn't see an urgent need for that immediately so I just went ahead - the ack usually means that it's OK to apply.
Hmm... I'm inclined to disagree. The Ack is a marker that I'm okay with the changes, but the note after makes it pretty clear that the preference would be for the patch to be handled via an IB.
On Fri, May 02, 2014 at 09:09:44AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
On Thu, 01 May 2014, Mark Brown wrote:
Sure, but I didn't see an urgent need for that immediately so I just went ahead - the ack usually means that it's OK to apply.
Hmm... I'm inclined to disagree. The Ack is a marker that I'm okay with the changes, but the note after makes it pretty clear that the preference would be for the patch to be handled via an IB.
Right, and it's sitting on a separate branch which is (as we've seen) very easy to add a tag to if it turns out to be needed. This is what all the small topic branches are there for, it makes it really easy to cross merge, and obviously applying the patch on a branch is always going to be the first step in creating an immutable branch. It certainly doesn't seem worth getting worried about.
Really, if you're not happy for something to be applied you probably don't want to be acking it or you at least want to be really explicit about things.
participants (2)
-
Lee Jones -
Mark Brown