On Mon, 20 Jul 2015 21:08:19 +0100
Mark Brown [off-list ref] wrote:

On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 09:49:13PM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote:

quoted

Mark Brown [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 05:31:57PM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

- dropped pwm-regulator patches (should be submitted separately)

quoted

quoted

I think the second patch needs to go in with this series doesn't it?  It
was just the enable one that was good to go immediately IIRC.

quoted

I was planning on submitting those two patches after the PWM changes
have been merged, but you're right, maybe we should think about a proper
way to smoothly get all of them in the same release.

I see.  We should at least try to get the enable one in this time, I'd

Actually I was wrong about that patch: it depends on patch 1/15 of the
RFC ("pwm: add the pwm_is_enabled() helper").

like to just apply it and then either do a cross tree merge for the one
making use of the new functionality or (if the rest of the series gets
held up for some reason) just letting it get merged via Linus' tree.

quoted

I have rebased my work on top your regulator/topic/pwm branch containing
Lee's work [1].

quoted

Note that patch 1 has changed a bit to take Lee's additions into
account.

quoted

Thierry, could you create a branch based on Mark's regulator/topic/pwm
branch ?
If everybody agrees on the solution I'll send a v3 rebasing my work on
top of this topic branch.

I think that's fine for me, I can tag the PWM branch in my tree and
Thierry can pull that.

-- 
Boris Brezillon, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
http://free-electrons.com