On 07/05/12 23:00, Paul Gortmaker wrote:
On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 9:39 AM, Lee Jones<lee.jones@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 04/05/12 14:26, Chris Ball wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, May 04 2012, Lee Jones wrote:
I can either do that, or push it through Arnd's tree if you like (and
it's okay with him), as I will be supplying him with another pull
request after my next patch-set has been scrutinised. Would that suit
you better?
If the MMC patches are self-contained and it doesn't break anything to
Hi All,
The version of these patches that just appeared in linux-next is causing
build fails on about 5 different configs (versatile_defconfig etc).
It isn't hard to see (with hindsight) that the new function is declared in
an #ifdef CONFIG_OF block, but it's callers are not similarly guarded.
So you get things like this:
http://kisskb.ellerman.id.au/kisskb/buildresult/6272348/
If you can get a fixed up version into the linux-next queue ASAP, that
would be great.
I've fixed the issue. How would you like the fix?
As a fix patch, or a replacement for the broken one?
Kind regards,
Lee
merge them separately, my preference is to merge them via the MMC tree
(to avoid creating conflicts against other MMC patches in there).
If there are dependencies, going via Arnd instead is fine.
Okay, I'll knock up a small patch-set and send it to you.
I think it's 3 patches.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
