Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752640AbcJCNbh (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Oct 2016 09:31:37 -0400 Received: from mail-oi0-f48.google.com ([209.85.218.48]:34471 "EHLO mail-oi0-f48.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751260AbcJCNba (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 Oct 2016 09:31:30 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20160926155209.GC7509@tuxbot> References: <1473673015-33124-1-git-send-email-john@phrozen.org> <20160926155209.GC7509@tuxbot> From: Linus Walleij Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2016 15:31:29 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: qcom: fix masking of pinmux functions To: Bjorn Andersson Cc: Stephen Boyd , John Crispin , "linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org" , Linux Kernel Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1238 Lines: 39 On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 5:52 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote: > On Sun 25 Sep 23:36 PDT 2016, Stephen Boyd wrote: > >> On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 2:36 AM, John Crispin wrote: >> > The following commit introduced a regression by not properly masking the >> > calculated value. >> > >> > commit 47a01ee9a6c39fe1 ("pinctrl: qcom: Clear all function selection bits") > > Please use the format: Fixes: %h (\"%s\") > >> > >> > Signed-off-by: John Crispin >> >> Now I'm confused how it ever worked.... but agreed, the code looks wrong. > > I agree, we should have seen some issues based on this, I presume we > where "lucky". > >> >> Reviewed-by: Stephen Boyd >> > > Reviewed-by: Bjorn Andersson > > @Linus, the corrected patch appeared in v4.8-rc1, would you mind > including this in a pull for v4.8? I would have, had I been more attentive. And you even told me in person to look at this :/ sorry. Now I have the problem that I don't have the original patch in my inbox at all: it might have been sent to some qcom-specific mailing list? John: can you include the ACKs and resend with me on the To: line? Yours, Linus Walleij