Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753963Ab3J0T2r (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 Oct 2013 15:28:47 -0400 Received: from mail-ee0-f47.google.com ([74.125.83.47]:65358 "EHLO mail-ee0-f47.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752672Ab3J0T2q (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 Oct 2013 15:28:46 -0400 Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2013 20:29:11 +0100 From: Daniel Vetter To: Guenter Roeck Cc: Greg KH , Rob Pearce , Daniel Vetter , David Airlie , intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] INTEL DRM DRIVERS : No LVDS hardware on Intel D410PT and D425KT Message-ID: <20131027192911.GK18189@phenom.ffwll.local> Mail-Followup-To: Guenter Roeck , Greg KH , Rob Pearce , David Airlie , intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <526D3BB6.6020902@flitspace.org.uk> <20131027173302.GA25812@kroah.com> <526D5D0E.5090604@roeck-us.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <526D5D0E.5090604@roeck-us.net> X-Operating-System: Linux phenom 3.10-2-amd64 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1336 Lines: 34 On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 11:35:58AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On 10/27/2013 10:33 AM, Greg KH wrote: > >On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 04:13:42PM +0000, Rob Pearce wrote: > >>From: Rob Pearce > >> > >>The Intel D410PT(LW) and D425KT Mini-ITX desktop boards both show up as > >>having LVDS but the hardware is not populated. This patch adds them to > >>the list of such systems. Patch is against 3.11.4 > >> > >>Signed-off-by: Rob Pearce > >>--- > >>Patch revised to match the D425KT exactly as the D425KTW does have LVDS. > >>According to Intel's documentation, the D410PTL and D410PLTW don't. > > > >Any reason you don't want this in the stable tree as well? > > > > Hi Greg, > > pardon my ignorance, but I thought this was supposed to be the maintainer's call to make ? > Did I get this wrong ? Maintainer occasionally fumble it, so it's better when the patch submitter also thinks about this. I can always change it when I disagree ;-) -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/