> Since you raised concern on the patch I thought of reworking this patch. > But I can see that this patch is already applied for i2c/for-next. > Kindly let me know whether I should be sending follow-up patches on top > of i2c/for-next ? Oops, that was a mistake on my side. I'll revert that patch. Please think of the patch as not-applied-yet. Thanks!
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
