Am Dienstag, 1. Juni 2021, 20:33:51 CEST schrieb Chris Morgan: > On Tue, Jun 01, 2021 at 06:39:44PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > > On Tue, 01 Jun 2021, Chris Morgan wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Jun 01, 2021 at 04:58:32PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > > > > On Tue, 01 Jun 2021, Lee Jones wrote: > > > > > > > > > I've applied the non-Arm patches. > > > > > > > > > > The following changes since commit 6efb943b8616ec53a5e444193dccf1af9ad627b5: > > > > > > > > > > Linux 5.13-rc1 (2021-05-09 14:17:44 -0700) > > > > > > > > > > are available in the Git repository at: > > > > > > > > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/lee/mfd.git tb-mfd-asoc-v5.14 > > > > > > > > > > for you to fetch changes up to 437faaa6cebadf8ff4c2c28d7cb26ed4e34aeb14: > > > > > > > > > > dt-bindings: Add Rockchip rk817 audio CODEC support (2021-06-01 13:40:41 +0100) > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > Immutable branch between MFD and ASoC due for the v5.14 merge window > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > Chris Morgan (3): > > > > > mfd: Add Rockchip rk817 audio CODEC support > > > > > ASoC: Add Rockchip rk817 audio CODEC support > > > > > dt-bindings: Add Rockchip rk817 audio CODEC support > > > > > > > > > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/rk808.txt | 188 +++++++++ > > > > > drivers/mfd/rk808.c | 81 ++++ > > > > > include/linux/mfd/rk808.h | 81 ++++ > > > > > sound/soc/codecs/Kconfig | 6 + > > > > > sound/soc/codecs/Makefile | 2 + > > > > > sound/soc/codecs/rk817_codec.c | 539 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > > 6 files changed, 897 insertions(+) > > > > > create mode 100644 sound/soc/codecs/rk817_codec.c > > > > > > > > Looks like the builders reported a W=1 warning introduced by the set. > > > > > > > > Would you like me to fix it and submit a patch? > > > > > > I can't seem to reproduce the warning, are there more details as to > > > what is causing it? > > > > Yes, it's a W=1 warning. Put that on your command line. > > Got it. Want me to resubmit the patch? Looks like I was requesting a > return value from a function and not doing anything with it. from Lee's earlier mail I guess he prefers a followup patch to fix the issue.
