From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964816Ab3FSTha (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Jun 2013 15:37:30 -0400 Received: from cassiel.sirena.org.uk ([80.68.93.111]:51401 "EHLO cassiel.sirena.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934566Ab3FSTh3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Jun 2013 15:37:29 -0400 Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 20:36:52 +0100 From: Mark Brown To: Oleksandr Kozaruk Cc: tony@atomide.com, sameo@linux.intel.com, lgirdwood@gmail.com, grant.likely@linaro.org, rob.herring@calxeda.com, rob@landley.net, t-kristo@ti.com, gg@slimlogic.co.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <20130619193652.GJ1403@sirena.org.uk> References: <1371644642-934-1-git-send-email-oleksandr.kozaruk@ti.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="qRu+kOci6Aaql5G6" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1371644642-934-1-git-send-email-oleksandr.kozaruk@ti.com> X-Cookie: Tomorrow, you can be anywhere. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 82.42.102.178 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: broonie@sirena.org.uk Subject: Re: [PATCH] MFD: Change TWL6025 references to TWL6032 X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2.1 (built Mon, 26 Dec 2011 16:57:07 +0000) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on cassiel.sirena.org.uk) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --qRu+kOci6Aaql5G6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 03:24:02PM +0300, Oleksandr Kozaruk wrote: > There are non-mainline branches that use twl6032 by its name (for example > git://git.omapzoom.org/kernel/omap.git). There is intention to add support > of twl6032 device in mainline, but we'd like to know if we can use twl6032 > instead of twl6025 in our new patches, that we are going to provide. > Related discussion: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/2686331/ It's always been OK to use the new name, the only question was if it was better to keep the old name supported as well. Given that the chips are essentially nonexistant now your current approach seems sensible so Reviwed-by: Mark Brown --qRu+kOci6Aaql5G6 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJRwghRAAoJELSic+t+oim91rMQAJUAcSoRIh6J8WgAp3MuXH6I wHaM1UWySf8ULxIdOorogkQ4oIRoK4Tb9bP9BnvN36X4SEG6l/A850Awvg+LX5k+ vQwEwzekW9BG/KgzYbz6172Nym9WjDQJx9mnCo0W/FCSSr4v95pZHyZsV6ZX64K5 wwkORVriKT00Tc2q7x++qFKw6oUKVCyfeFXLXbs+rTreZuwZk9hK+2ZigfKoetkw GNQ1fI3O65eAmUtETPPmfNRnmVypF5Nll4UgcqpTNDrwZfQPvcVe/eq9MVLpp+f4 gl8zS2VpcSfMR0MY/9zgbiPYQPQSYDqiGQ14naEJOm8hUYGnxd8TB31TjoGIwXXm TqhMfSKpDiWAUsCprcfym8ZC7CGm1B/JNABLg389t4B7MLesVGR/MfhxncSFHb3H wnbsTUG08JAY6ejC5EkcHgHtNwxONptbRJt/YGrdqvExmCMAae+5Q5mY0SsnYDzv 2vox1lJzHr4Qu3Tqxain3i5LOCNBp+3Iwym5YfvqQc+H4XdWbCAscfc6/xl1YlU1 ihTbHoLBUps608p+gLPdfN0DTDm292DBrYSofR40Dl+8XnLAwBgIpO6rcttKiwI3 7lIsKwQ9gqDAA9sKFLgN1TM+mbQ47QFW6RykoYB5aczMEcUnPZjQMAlf9kX5qX46 1d2wtP4/y/vCUWiTyjYo =lZSA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --qRu+kOci6Aaql5G6--