On Sat, Apr 25, 2020 at 08:24:17PM +0200, Stephan Gerhold wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 04:22:43PM +0300, Andi Shyti wrote:
> > Hi Stephan,
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 01:34:46PM +0200, Stephan Gerhold wrote:
> > > On Fri, Apr 24, 2020 at 12:29:37PM +0300, Andi Shyti wrote:
> > > > Hi guys,
> > > >
> > > > > }, {
> > > > > .compatible = "melfas,mms152",
> > > > > .data = (void *)TYPE_MMS152,
> > > > > + }, {
> > > > > + .compatible = "melfas,mms345l",
> > > > > + .data = (void *)TYPE_MMS345L,
> > > > > },
> > > >
> > > > it's been some times I haven't been doing this, but is the order
> > > > of the patches correct? shouldn't the binding be updated first?
> > > >
> > >
> > > Yes. I had it correct in my original patch, but apparently swapped the
> > > order accidentally for this one. I will do it correct again next time :)
> >
> > then with that change:
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Andi Shyti <andi@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
>
> Hi Dmitry,
>
> I assume there is little reason to resend just to swap the order.
> (You could just apply them in reverse order since they do not depend
> on each other...)
>
> But if there is something else I should change just let me know.
No, that is it, I just applied the both.
Thanks.
--
Dmitry
