Hi Thierry
On Tue, 12 Apr 2016 13:01:52 +0200
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 10:03:24PM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> > Commit 5c31252c4a86 ("pwm: Add the pwm_is_enabled() helper") introduced a
> > new function to test whether a PWM device is enabled or not without
> > manipulating PWM internal fields.
> > Hiding this is necessary if we want to smoothly move to the atomic PWM
> > config approach without impacting PWM drivers.
> > Fix this driver to use pwm_is_enabled() instead of directly accessing the
> > ->flags field.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/pwm/pwm-rcar.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> Applied, thanks.
I'd like to rebase my atomic series on top of pwm/for-next but I don't
see the 4 patches you said you applied. Did you forget to push
your local branch, or did you decide to revert them based on Lee's
comments?
Regards,
Boris
--
Boris Brezillon, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
http://free-electrons.com
--
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
