On Tue, 07 Oct 2014, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 11:14 AM, Lee Jones <lee.jo...@linaro.org> wrote: > > On Wed, 01 Oct 2014, Linus Walleij wrote: > > > >> On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 4:15 PM, Pramod Gurav > >> <pramod.gu...@smartplayin.com> wrote: > >> > >> > Get rid of using return value from gpiochip_remove() as it returns > >> > void. > >> > > >> > Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.wall...@linaro.org> > >> > Cc: Alexandre Courbot <gnu...@gmail.com> > >> > Cc: Samuel Ortiz <sa...@linux.intel.com> > >> > CC: Lee Jones <lee.jo...@linaro.org> > >> > Cc: linux-g...@vger.kernel.org > >> > > >> > Signed-off-by: Pramod Gurav <pramod.gu...@smartplayin.com> > >> > >> Already fixed in the GPIO tree. > > > > What does that mean? That it doesn't need fixing here? > > No. I think you already ACKed the patch fixing it in the GPIO > tree...
No I don't need to apply the patch 'cos it's already fixed? Or, no it's not already fixed and I need to apply the patch? > There has been some misunderstanding and duplicate patches > fixing already fixed problems are flying around. I'm guessing from this commend that it _is_ already fixed and I _do not_ need to apply this patch. So for now I'm not applying this patch unless told otherwise. -- Lee Jones Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
