On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 12:06:29PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote: > On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 11:56:23AM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote: > > On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 10:56:50AM -0500, Franklin S Cooper Jr wrote: > > > Replace unit address from 0 to the proper physical address. Also insure > > > that the unit address matches the reg property address. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Franklin S Cooper Jr <fcooper@xxxxxx> > > > --- > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/pwm/pwm-tiecap.txt | 8 ++++---- > > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > I applied this long ago but never let you know: Applied, thanks. > > Actually I didn't. And it seems the reason is that it doesn't apply > cleanly. For some reason my tree doesn't have an entry for the ecap > example on am437x. Am I missing a patch? Can you resend whatever is > not in linux-next yet? Oh, nevermind my blabbering, it took me too long to realize that this is the series that Tony had picked up for the most part, and I hadn't properly marked it done in patchwork. I'll go get some coffee now. Thierry
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
