Hi,

On Sat, Jun 3, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Andy Shevchenko
[off-list ref] wrote:

On Sat, Jun 3, 2017 at 8:28 PM, Sathyanarayanan Kuppuswamy Natarajan
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Hi,

On Sat, Jun 3, 2017 at 6:00 AM, Andy Shevchenko
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 1:37 AM,
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

From: Kuppuswamy Sathyanarayanan <sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@linux.intel.com>

PMIC mfd driver only exports first level irq for thermal device.
But currently we are reading the irqs from the second level irq
chip, So this patch fixes this issue by adding support to use
first level PMIC thermal irq.

Shouldn't be this squashed to patch 2?

There is no compilation dependency between patch 2 and 3. But they are
functionally dependent.

Should we squash functionally dependent patches too ?

Let's assume we applied patches 1 and 2, does it mean the regression
to the existing behaviour?

Yes, Just applying patch 1 & 2 and not apply patch 3 will create
regression in thermal driver.

Since there is no compilation dependency between patch 2 & 3 and they
are from two different domains, I submitted them separately to make it
easier for review.

(For example, device worked improperly in some cases -> stopped
working completely)

--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko

-- 
Sathya