On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 09:11:57AM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 04:57:21PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > Turns out it's commit ad53012 "i2c: Fix bus-level power management > > callbacks" in the PM tree that it depends on. Does it make sense to > > merge this via there rather than via your tree? > Why would an i2c specific patch be needed here? Do you have a pointer > to that patch? Despite the patch title being I2C specific it actually includes exposing some of the runtime PM implementation to external users - I2C being the first user of the generic PM runtime callbacks that I'm trying to use in the platform device implementation. http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/sfr/linux-next.git;a=commitdiff;h=ad530128cd302e5df930b6eb4d4c7e162c40fcb2;hp=b938b00444e900f1c86e754539e3d00f172c184e http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/sfr/linux-next.git;a=commitdiff;h=d690b2cd222afc75320b9b8e9da7df02e9e630ca > And yes, if it depends on something else in the PM tree, feel free to > send this patch also through it, I have no objection to that. Rafael, > care to pick it up? Mark, you might have to resend it to him. OK, Raphael please let me know if you need a resend. Greg, I guess I can add your Acked-by to that? _______________________________________________ linux-pm mailing list linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm
