Hi Sebastian, perhaps the message slipped through the cracks? I'm happy to do whatever is needed to get the patch set into 5.1, but it seems I need some help and clarifications. Thank you, Lubo On Thu, 2019-01-31 at 13:26 +0100, Lubomir Rintel wrote: > Hi, > > On Wed, 2019-01-23 at 21:56 +0100, Sebastian Reichel wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 06:40:00PM +0100, Lubomir Rintel wrote: > > > The XO-1 and XO-1.5 batteries apparently differ in an ability to report > > > ambient temperature. Add a different compatible string to the 1.5 > > > battery. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Lubomir Rintel <lkundrak@xxxxx> > > > Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxx> > > > > > > --- > > > > I either need an Acked-by from the x86 platform maintainers, that I > > can queue this through power-supply or a pull request for an immutable > > branch (probably the better idea). > > I'm happy to prepare a branch that could be pulled from. In fact, > here's a branch with fixes for issues pointed out by the review that > could be pulled from: > > git pull https://github.com/hackerspace/olpc-xo175-linux lr/olpc-xo175-battery-for-v5.1 > > What do really not understand is how does this help. This is probably > just my unfamiliarity with the process; but perhaps you could help me > get less unfamiliar. Would it somehow help with a potential (though > unlikely) conflict resolution? Would an Ack from x86 crowd serve as an > altenative way off making sure things in their tree won't conflict with > this one? > > > -- Sebastian > > Thank you > Lubo >
