Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] regulator: tps65090: Make FETs more reliable by adding retries

[Doug Anderson]

Mark,

On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> 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
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/