Tom On 05/02/2016 12:58 PM, Tom Rini wrote: > On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 12:54:43PM -0500, Dan Murphy wrote: >> Joe >> >> On 05/02/2016 11:08 AM, Joe Hershberger wrote: >>> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 6:59 AM, Dan Murphy <dmur...@ti.com> wrote: >>>> Add the ability to read the phy-handle node of the >>>> cpsw slave. Upon reading this handle the phy-id >>>> can be stored based on the reg node in the DT. >>>> >>>> The phy-handle also needs to be stored and passed >>>> to the phy to access any phy data that is available. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Dan Murphy <dmur...@ti.com> >>>> --- >>>> >>>> v7 - Fixed checkpatch issues - https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/610946/ >>>> Checkpatch LTL issues still remain and resolving will break readability >>>> >>>> WARNING: line over 80 characters >>>> #47: FILE: drivers/net/cpsw.c:1230: >>>> WARNING: line over 80 characters >>>> #50: FILE: drivers/net/cpsw.c:1233: >>> Looks like you dropped most of the Acked-by and Tested-by from the >>> last version. Please resend with those included. >> Do we include the Acked-by in the patch? > So, you don't need to resend vX -> v(X+1) if the only change for the > whole series is collecting ack/tested/reviewed, patchwork does that for > us. If you're making changes to part of a series from vX -> v(X+1) and > some areas are unchanged, yes, you should collect the previous > acked/reviewed. I think you need to go back and see what > ack/tested/reviewed still apply and include those in v8, yes. Thanks! > Do I have to up rev the series if I am just adding in acked/reviewed information?
Dan -- ------------------ Dan Murphy _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
