On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 07:14:18PM +0200, Robert Jarzmik wrote:
> From 20002639eac1bd7a81b0613c4bd15ae7522c269d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Robert Jarzmik
> Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2015 19:07:48 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: mtd: docg3: add docg3 maintainer
>
> Add myself as maintainer of
Brian Norris writes:
> Hi Robert,
>
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 10:41:33PM +0200, Robert Jarzmik wrote:
>> Richard Weinberger writes:
>>
>> > Am 17.06.2015 um 20:41 schrieb Brian Norris:
>> >> Have you tested this patch?
>> >
>> > nah, I don't own such a device.
>> But I do. If you resend a patch
Hi Robert,
On Tue, Jun 23, 2015 at 10:41:33PM +0200, Robert Jarzmik wrote:
> Richard Weinberger writes:
>
> > Am 17.06.2015 um 20:41 schrieb Brian Norris:
> >> Have you tested this patch?
> >
> > nah, I don't own such a device.
> But I do. If you resend a patch, please Cc me. You can even ask fo
Richard Weinberger writes:
> Am 17.06.2015 um 20:41 schrieb Brian Norris:
>> On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 11:10:54PM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote:
>>> Don't return a obfuscated null pointer using ERR_PTR(0).
>>> If the no device is found clearly return -ENODEV.
>>> This makes the code more clear an
Am 17.06.2015 um 20:41 schrieb Brian Norris:
> On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 11:10:54PM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote:
>> Don't return a obfuscated null pointer using ERR_PTR(0).
>> If the no device is found clearly return -ENODEV.
>> This makes the code more clear and matches the comment
>> of doc_pro
On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 11:10:54PM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> Don't return a obfuscated null pointer using ERR_PTR(0).
> If the no device is found clearly return -ENODEV.
> This makes the code more clear and matches the comment
> of doc_probe_device().
>
> Signed-off-by: Richard Weinberger
6 matches
Mail list logo