On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 01:01:19PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
> My reminders sent directly to you explicitly mentioned it being a
> regression every time. That should trigger a maintainer's interest
> enough to look at the quoted context or ask for a resend.
Sadly what I actually ended up reading
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 11:38:08AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 12:01:03PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
>
> > I might have read too much into that response, but the pings were hardly
> > contentless (they all included the commit message and some the full patch).
>
> It's the n
On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 12:01:03PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
> I might have read too much into that response, but the pings were hardly
> contentless (they all included the commit message and some the full patch).
It's the new content that is important here - if it boils down to "have
you looked
On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 07:46:54PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 06:46:30PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
>
> > Yes, resending is sometimes needed, but what set me off here was your
> > comment that resending might not be enough even after you've now become
> > aware of a several
On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 06:46:30PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
> Yes, resending is sometimes needed, but what set me off here was your
> comment that resending might not be enough even after you've now become
> aware of a several-month old regression in your subsystem.
If you're referring to my or
On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 05:24:05PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 11:51:59AM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > If Mark feels that he is getting spammed with unrelated MFD patches,
> > then *you* and Mark need to figure out a way to get a message across
> > when there actually is s
On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 11:13:55AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> In future, for yourself and anyone else who is following this thread
> for 'fun', if a patch crosses multiple subsystems (which I try to keep
> to a minimum) it's probably best to indicate that in the subject line.
> mfd: regulator:
>
On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 11:51:59AM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 10:10:49AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > Yes, *you*. If a patch slips though a Maintainer's net, which does
> > happen every so often [*], I'm sure even you are not infallible to
> > that, a submitter must issue
On Mon, 18 May 2015, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 10:10:49AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Fri, 15 May 2015, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 08:19:43AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 13 May 2015, Mark Brown wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Wed, May 13, 2015
On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 10:10:49AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Fri, 15 May 2015, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 08:19:43AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > On Wed, 13 May 2015, Mark Brown wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 05:54:19PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > > > On We
On Fri, 15 May 2015, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 08:19:43AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Wed, 13 May 2015, Mark Brown wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 05:54:19PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 13 May 2015, Mark Brown wrote:
> > >
> > > > > If you're looking fo
On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 08:19:43AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Wed, 13 May 2015, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 05:54:19PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > On Wed, 13 May 2015, Mark Brown wrote:
> >
> > > > If you're looking for me to review something you need to send it to me,
> >
On Wed, 13 May 2015, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 05:54:19PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Wed, 13 May 2015, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > > If you're looking for me to review something you need to send it to me,
> > > and the chances of me looking at it are very much increased if there
On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 05:54:19PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Wed, 13 May 2015, Mark Brown wrote:
> > If you're looking for me to review something you need to send it to me,
> > and the chances of me looking at it are very much increased if there's a
> > relevant subject line. I'm CCed (not eve
On Wed, 13 May 2015, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 04:43:33PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Wed, 29 Apr 2015, Lee Jones wrote:
>
> > > I'm in the same situation -- can't do anything without an Ack from Mark.
>
> > I happen to know that Mark regularly deletes his mail.
>
> > Can y
On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 04:43:33PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Apr 2015, Lee Jones wrote:
> > I'm in the same situation -- can't do anything without an Ack from Mark.
> I happen to know that Mark regularly deletes his mail.
> Can you re-sent this complete with collected Acks please?
If
On Wed, 29 Apr 2015, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Apr 2015, Johan Hovold wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 03:04:06PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > > Hi Mark and Lee,
> > >
> > > On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 08:32:09AM +, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 25 Mar 2015, Johan Hovold wrote:
> >
On Wed, 29 Apr 2015, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 03:04:06PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > Hi Mark and Lee,
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 08:32:09AM +, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > On Wed, 25 Mar 2015, Johan Hovold wrote:
> > >
> > > > Fix broken probe of da9052 regulators, whi
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 03:04:06PM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote:
> Hi Mark and Lee,
>
> On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 08:32:09AM +, Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Wed, 25 Mar 2015, Johan Hovold wrote:
> >
> > > Fix broken probe of da9052 regulators, which since commit b3f6c73db732
> > > ("mfd: da9052-core: F
Hi Mark and Lee,
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 08:32:09AM +, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Mar 2015, Johan Hovold wrote:
>
> > Fix broken probe of da9052 regulators, which since commit b3f6c73db732
> > ("mfd: da9052-core: Fix platform-device id collision") use a
> > non-deterministic platform-devic
FAO Mark:
> Fix broken probe of da9052 regulators, which since commit b3f6c73db732
> ("mfd: da9052-core: Fix platform-device id collision") use a
> non-deterministic platform-device id to retrieve static regulator
> information. Fortunately, adequate error handling was in place so probe
> would si
On Wed, 25 Mar 2015, Johan Hovold wrote:
> Fix broken probe of da9052 regulators, which since commit b3f6c73db732
> ("mfd: da9052-core: Fix platform-device id collision") use a
> non-deterministic platform-device id to retrieve static regulator
> information. Fortunately, adequate error handling w
Hi,
On Wednesday, March 25, 2015 12:07:04 PM Johan Hovold wrote:
> Fix broken probe of da9052 regulators, which since commit b3f6c73db732
> ("mfd: da9052-core: Fix platform-device id collision") use a
> non-deterministic platform-device id to retrieve static regulator
> information. Fortunately,
23 matches
Mail list logo
