> > > ROHM. Also, I am not terribly excited about the option of changing this > > > back to function-pointer as I already removed the pointer from parent > > > data and this changed parent data is already adapted to all sub drivers > > > - so this is all just babbling. Maybe it is just my huge ego shouting > > > there - 'I was right, I must have the final say'. > > > > No, a call-back function would be a back-step. > > You are probably right. > > > Ego or no ego, you're wrong. =:-D > > I'd rephrase that as "It's not that I am wrong, but you are right." =) Works for me. > > > As a side note, I already did submit v12 with other styling fixes but > > > which left the WDT function in MFD. If you still see the WDT functions > > > should be exported from WDT - then please ignore the v12. I'll do v13 > > > at the afternoon (my time, which is only a bit after noon your time I > > > guess) which will export these functions from WDT. (Well, I had to try > > > once more :D) > > > > Please keep the WDT code in the WDT driver. Create a little stub for > > the cases where the WDT driver is not enabled - job done. > > Yes Sir. =;-) -- Lee Jones [李琼斯] Linaro Services Technical Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
