On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 10:44:18AM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Feb 2020 11:34:43 +0100
> Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 10:29:15AM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > > On Mon, 3 Feb 2020 21:31:26 +0100
> > > Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > > These two defines are unused since the driver was introduced in commit
> > > > 02b829f9e11f ("iio: dac: Add support for ltc2632 DACs").
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > A bit of fuzz and the mysterious bit of this being patch 4 of 3 aside all good.
> > >
> > > Applied to the togreg branch of iio.git and pushed out as testing.
> >
> > If you applied patches 2 and 3 of the series before, the fuzz should
> > disappear. I assume the threading didn't work as intended for you and
> > you don't have the original patch series grouped with my patch 4/3?
> Yup. Just realised that after sending :)
>
> I'll apply them in the right order.
Last time I already wondered why patches you applied don't appear in
next. This had something to do with the workflow how patches go from you
over Greg to Linus.
Given that next is different and in my experience it is possible to get
a tree into next even as a "second-level" maintainer, I wonder if adding
your tree would be beneficial. You applied the patch more than two weeks
ago and there is still no exposure to next. :-|
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
