On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Timur Tabi <timur@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I ran checkpatch on it and it didn't complain. In this case checkpatch should have given you an error due to the missing Signed-off-by tag :-) -- 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
Re: [PATCH 1/4] Revert "gpio: set up initial state from .get_direction()"
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] Revert "gpio: set up initial state from .get_direction()"
- From: Fabio Estevam <festevam@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2017 10:33:19 -0200
- In-reply-to: <a6c8b2ac-29de-4ec7-7b3f-fac1b5b16942@codeaurora.org>
- References: <1509396602-1936-1-git-send-email-timur@codeaurora.org> <1509396602-1936-2-git-send-email-timur@codeaurora.org> <1509440926.10233.77.camel@linux.intel.com> <a6c8b2ac-29de-4ec7-7b3f-fac1b5b16942@codeaurora.org>
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- [PATCH 0/4] [v6] pinctrl: qcom: add support for sparse GPIOs
- From: Timur Tabi
- [PATCH 1/4] Revert "gpio: set up initial state from .get_direction()"
- From: Timur Tabi
- Re: [PATCH 1/4] Revert "gpio: set up initial state from .get_direction()"
- From: Andy Shevchenko
- Re: [PATCH 1/4] Revert "gpio: set up initial state from .get_direction()"
- From: Timur Tabi
- [PATCH 0/4] [v6] pinctrl: qcom: add support for sparse GPIOs
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 1/4] Revert "gpio: set up initial state from .get_direction()"
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 1/4] Revert "gpio: set up initial state from .get_direction()"
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 1/4] Revert "gpio: set up initial state from .get_direction()"
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 1/4] Revert "gpio: set up initial state from .get_direction()"
- Index(es):
 |