On 02/04/11 16:16, G, Manjunath Kondaiah wrote: > On Fri, Feb 04, 2011 at 03:08:47PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote: >> On Fri, Feb 04, 2011 at 07:02:50PM +0530, G, Manjunath Kondaiah wrote: >>> On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 09:19:53AM -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: >>>> On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 08:54:05AM -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote: >>>>> On Thu, Feb 03, 2011 at 08:51:46PM +0530, Sourav Poddar wrote: >>>>>> The ads7846 driver requests a gpio but does not currently >>>>>> configure it explicitly as an input. Use gpio_request_one >>>>>> to request and configure it at one shot. >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Sourav Poddar <sourav.poddar@xxxxxx> >>>>>> Cc: Dmitry Torokhov <dtor@xxxxxxx> >>>>> Will apply this one, the other one is a bit messy IMO, will have to >>>>> think about it. >>>>> >>>> Something like below should do I think. >>> Patch looks good but it applies only on top of previous patch: >>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/529941/ >>> >>> Why to have two patches for this fix? >> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-omap/msg45167.html > My point here is: > 1. The first patch only replaces gpio_request with gpio_request_one > 2. Rest of the things are handled in 2nd patch posted by dmitry > > What is harm in merging both the patches? I don't think it affects > readability. Because the changes introduced by the patches are from different nature. As stated in the link above, one is a functional change (gpio setup change) and second is fixing the imbalance in request - free calls. The impact is not readability, but bad bisect-ability. -- Regards, Igor. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
