On Wed, 2012-06-27 at 14:14 +0200, Roland Stigge wrote: > Thanks for the note! I'm sending an incremental patch. There was > actually only one place in the two functions that could fail (return > code of lpc32xx_xfer()). Could you please check the MCL patch as well and re-send it against the l2 tree? I've squashed your change into the driver and pushed out, thanks! -- Best Regards, Artem Bityutskiy
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
