Hi Simon,
On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 8:02 AM, Simon Horman <horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 02:25:04PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> (this time reply-to-all)
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 2:38 PM, Chris Brandt <chris.brandt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > Reported-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@xxxxxxxxx>
>> > Signed-off-by: Chris Brandt <chris.brandt@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> > Fixes: 66474697923c ("ARM: dts: r7s72100: add sdhi to device tree")
>>
>> Acked-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> Thanks, I have queued this up for v4.12.
>
> The fixes tag above indicates this is a fix for v4.10, however, when I
> tried to apply it on top of v4.11-rc1 there was a conflict. So I think a
> backport will be required if we want it to be considered for v4.11 and be
> considered for and in turn v4.10-stable.
That's because of commit 3d2abda02ad2d06d
("ARM: dts: r7s72100: update sdhi clock bindings")
> This makes things a bit messy with regards to conflicts between v4.11 and
> v4.12 and I'm inclined to pass on the backport.
If you ever want to backport, you'll have two backport changes too the
SDHI driver, too.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
