On 07/02/12 12:54, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote: > On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 10:06 PM, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Great! It looks like device_type doesn't have any list iteration support >> though. Is that requirement gone? > Pretty much, yeah. I'll soon post a separate patch which removes the > get_by_name functionality (together with its related klist). > >> Will you resend this as part of a series? It will be easier to review then. > Not sure. There's a collection of discrete patches that I've been > posting, but they really aren't an organic series: as long as the > dependencies are met, each and every one of them is applicable even if > applied alone. > > So I'd prefer (when possible) to treat patches in a discrete fashion > so we can start applying them and unblock others who depend on them > (e.g. Fernando's runtime PM work depends on this one). > > But if you prefer me to send this one patch differently to make it > easier to review, let me know! > Ok then. Please add Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> It would be nice if you got an ack from Greg or Kay on the device_type usage too. -- Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
