On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 9:17 PM, Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 10:41:33AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 5:08 PM, Dan O'Donovan <dan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Mark, any objections here? > > I've not looked yet, please allow a reasonable time for review Sure, no problem at all. > (there still seemed to be ongoing discussion at the ACPI level). Honestly, I'm not sure what you mean. The first patch in the series (which is the ACPI level here) does not seem to be controversial at all and the i2c one has been acked already. > I continue to be concerned about the amount of duplication and special casing that the > various firmware paths seem to entail. Well, this particular change is relatively straightforward and one can argue that it fixes a bug. It does address a problem for sure. Thanks, Rafael -- 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
