On Tue, Sep 22, 2020 at 12:02:33PM +0100, Alex Dewar wrote:
> On 22/09/2020 10:27, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> > Em Tue, 22 Sep 2020 10:09:07 +0100
> > Alex Dewar <alex.dewar90@xxxxxxxxx> escreveu:
> >
> > > Hi Mauro,
> > >
> > > I've rebased the patches now, but there is a slight hiccup. For patches 2
> > > and 3 of this series there will now be a conflict with commit 9289cdf39992
> > > ("staging: media: atomisp: Convert to GPIO descriptors") in Greg's tree.
> > >
> > > I'm not sure what the best way to handle this is? The merge conflicts
> > > will be trivial (due to a conversion between the gpio_* and gpiod_*
> > > APIs), but I could alternatively send these last two patches in via
> > > Greg's tree if that's easier for people. Let me know what works.
> > Maybe the best would be to re-send those after the merge window, when
> > both patches will arrive upstream.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Mauro
> That sounds more sensible. I've also just noticed that I introduced a bug in
> the first patch when rebasing it :-/, so let's hold off on the whole series
> and I'll do a proper tidy and resend after the next merge window.
Is the bug the memory leak if lm3554_platform_data_func() fails?
regards,
dan carpenter
