On Wed, 2015-02-11 at 17:46 +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > + PUNIT_SEMAPHORE, &sem); > > + if (ret) > > dev_err(dev->dev, "iosf failed to read punit semaphore\n"); > > else > > dev_err(dev->dev, "PUNIT SEM: %d\n", sem); > > Shouldn't the latter be a dev_dbg? Wolfram, do we agree on this as states in the patch? Maybe you have more comments, questions? Otherwise, should I rebase this on top of 4.0-rc1 or you will be okay with current version? -- Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx> Intel Finland Oy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
