From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752257AbeEPOhj (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 May 2018 10:37:39 -0400 Received: from mo4-p01-ob.smtp.rzone.de ([85.215.255.54]:23451 "EHLO mo4-p01-ob.smtp.rzone.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751389AbeEPOhh (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 May 2018 10:37:37 -0400 X-RZG-AUTH: ":JGIXVUS7cutRB/49FwqZ7WcJeFKiMgPgp8VKxflSZ1P34KBj4Qpw87WivdN1GDmY" X-RZG-CLASS-ID: mo00 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/7] pcal6524 extensions and fixes for pca953x driver From: "H. Nikolaus Schaller" In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 16 May 2018 16:37:23 +0200 Cc: Kumar Gala , Andy Shevchenko , Rob Herring , Pawel Moll , Mark Rutland , Ian Campbell , Alexandre Courbot , "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" , "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Discussions about the Letux Kernel , kernel@pyra-handheld.com Message-Id: <9213FFC0-3C2B-447D-AA2C-55D7F93CFA27@goldelico.com> References: <6AA622D1-DA8C-4C58-8EAE-555989E69149@goldelico.com> To: Linus Walleij X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mail.home.local id w4GEbiUo009284 > Am 16.05.2018 um 16:31 schrieb Linus Walleij : > > On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 3:32 PM, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: >>> Am 16.05.2018 um 13:53 schrieb Linus Walleij : >>> On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 6:31 PM, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote: >>> >>>> V5: >>>> * fix wrong split up between patches 1/7and 2/7. >>> >>> I applied patches 1, 2, 3 so we get some movement on the patch >>> set and not too much for you to rebase. >> >> thanks! >> >> Well, I already had edited the commit messages for resending... >> >>> >>> It's fine to just resend the rest next time. >> >> There is only one point open before resending: >> >> what is the preferred style to be used for PCAL_GPIO_MASK? >> >> * GENMASK(4, 0) >> * or 0x1f > > No strong opinion... sorry. Whatever you & the other driver > contributors are most convenient with. Ok, then let's keep the GENMASK(4, 0) since nobody did complain about it. BR and thanks, Nikolaus