From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760764AbZB0Uk3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Feb 2009 15:40:29 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759088AbZB0UkJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Feb 2009 15:40:09 -0500 Received: from n8b.bullet.sp1.yahoo.com ([69.147.64.169]:42595 "HELO n8b.bullet.sp1.yahoo.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1758427AbZB0UkI (ORCPT ); Fri, 27 Feb 2009 15:40:08 -0500 X-yahoo-newman-spamcop: yes X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 460771.33200.bm@omp418.mail.mud.yahoo.com DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=pacbell.net; h=Received:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:From:To:Subject:Date:User-Agent:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Disposition:Message-Id; b=0KjFuWT4v/72sQnmMqDaLLLH/PLMmPIGWsu9ggCTMtY+k7mexMh6x6LnlcsILqD88dAGI9dVyQpEmYqBi08xrK3OSAXDcxdFxbKz4KBjNLJscrFm9LY+UDXeaZR4Eo2fqyit+LX+iXhwHql+axBh2dNyHMWjH77Q3NK/a2mRVF0= ; X-YMail-OSG: 8BDLQ3kVM1mOdoo_KKwF60KstcfPgDyZynmL5AFOmiUY81SVaHThM7drxbqmXB1F0p7Mfws4eIs1uP8Wk578cu9FXeAugsnpEdsYnrMLCXucrfZsCs7uGjLfTMOI8GzKUSzzPyXnuxYtdBZx_LfKQNDdQO3zlTNpfLK.Uyb3rA2p1jDvQhbg.fdqyQ-- X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 From: David Brownell To: Liam Girdwood Subject: Re: [patch/rfc 2.6.29-rc6 2/2] regulator: twl4030 voltage enumeration (v2) Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 12:39:44 -0800 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10 Cc: Mark Brown , lkml , OMAP References: <200902081037.06645.david-b@pacbell.net> <200902261602.58832.david-b@pacbell.net> <1235737930.31223.117.camel@vega.slimlogic.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <1235737930.31223.117.camel@vega.slimlogic.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200902271239.44558.david-b@pacbell.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Friday 27 February 2009, Liam Girdwood wrote: > On Thu, 2009-02-26 at 16:02 -0800, David Brownell wrote: > > On Thursday 26 February 2009, Liam Girdwood wrote: > > > > > > > > Note that the twl4030 regulator patch referred to will need a > > > > minor patch to work with the -next tree, because of interface > > > > change in the regulator framework. > > > > > > Applied. > > > > .... and here's that "minor patch". > > > > ... > > Sorry, this didn't apply. It looks like I'm missing an earlier patch(s) > here. Could you regenerate this and your core patch against latest > for-next. The regulator -next tree seems to be missing a bunch of stuff... I generated this patch against a "twl4030-regulator.c" which I extracted *from that tree* yesterday. But today it's different. In this case, the current code doesn't have the $SUBJECT patch, which at that time you had applied. But it does have a small snippet from that "minor patch"... Color me confused. Are you asking for a "v3" of $SUBJECT, or is the "v2" going to re-appear? And when will that -next tree acquire the rest of http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=123567791402469&w=2 Having only the driver.h part of that patch breaks things (your 0ae0e667c8a2bacfe066b90f8f2ee3b4a83a120d). - Dave