From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Viresh Kumar Subject: Re: [PATCH] thermal: imx: remove cooling device Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2017 10:26:26 +0530 Message-ID: <20171115045626.GF3257@vireshk-i7> References: <20171114134829.1354-1-bst@pengutronix.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail-pg0-f67.google.com ([74.125.83.67]:48782 "EHLO mail-pg0-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752233AbdKOE43 (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Nov 2017 23:56:29 -0500 Received: by mail-pg0-f67.google.com with SMTP id s11so11696565pgc.5 for ; Tue, 14 Nov 2017 20:56:29 -0800 (PST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20171114134829.1354-1-bst@pengutronix.de> Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org To: Bastian Stender , shawnguo@kernel.org Cc: Zhang Rui , Eduardo Valentin , linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, kernel@pengutronix.de + Shawn On 14-11-17, 14:48, Bastian Stender wrote: > The cooling device should not be part of the i.MX thermal code but > rather in the i.MX cpufreq driver. So remove it here. > > Signed-off-by: Bastian Stender Shouldn't the two patches you sent be part of a series? What if one gets applied before the other? For example if the cpufreq patch gets applied before this one, then the kernel would break somewhere as two drivers would be adding the cpu-cooling device :) I am fine with the content of this patch though. -- viresh