On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 5:57 PM, Octavian Purdila <octavian.purdila@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 10:50 AM, Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 1:52 AM, Daniel Baluta <daniel.baluta@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 12/16/2014 04:40 PM, Axel Lin wrote: >>>> >>>> dln2_gpio_direction_output() ignored the state passed into it. Fix it. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Axel Lin <axel.lin@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> >>> Tested-by: Daniel Baluta <daniel.baluta@xxxxxxxxx> >> >> Acked-by: Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >> But this seems to apply to patches in mid-flight, could it be squashed >> there maybe? > > Sure, I can add it to the existing series, but I prefer to keep it as > separate patch. Is that ok with you? Why? This is clearly a fix, so if the series is not merged yet, doesn't it make more sense to squash it and have the desired functionality from the start? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-gpio" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html