Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 16 Apr 2014 14:34:47 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] regulator: tps65090: Make FETs more reliable by adding retries | From | Doug Anderson <> |
| |
Mark,
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote: > On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 11:25:24AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: >> An issue was discovered with tps65090 where sometimes the FETs >> wouldn't actually turn on when requested (they would report >> overcurrent). The most problematic FET was the one used for the LCD > > Please don't send new patches as replies in the middle of threads, it > makes it confusing trying to work out which versions of things should be > applied.
I'm a little confused about what I did wrong. Can you give more details?
* V1 had 3 patches plus a cover letter.
* I was asked to split two patches, so V2 has 5 patches plus a cover letter.
* My v2 series was all "in reply to" the v1 cover letter, which I thought was best practice.
* All of my v2 patches were marked with v2 and included changes between v1 and v2.
* Everyone was CCed on the cover letter. Only appropriate people were CCed on the individual patches (as per get_maintainer, automated by patman).
* All patches were resent at v2.
If I had to answer your question, I'd say that you should now completely ignore v1 and look at v2.
-Doug
| |