From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bjorn Andersson Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/6] pinctrl: qcom: ipq4019: Add IPQ4019 pinctrl support Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2016 16:41:12 -0800 Message-ID: References: <1447975173-29485-1-git-send-email-mmcclint@qca.qualcomm.com> <1447975173-29485-2-git-send-email-mmcclint@qca.qualcomm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1447975173-29485-2-git-send-email-mmcclint@qca.qualcomm.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Matthew McClintock , Linus Walleij Cc: Andy Gross , linux-arm-msm , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org" , Varadarajan Narayanan , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , qca-upstream.external@qca.qualcomm.com, Sricharan R , Mathieu Olivari , Matthew McClintock List-Id: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 3:19 PM, Matthew McClintock wrote: > From: Varadarajan Narayanan > > Add pinctrl driver support for IPQ4019 platform > > Signed-off-by: Sricharan R > Signed-off-by: Mathieu Olivari > Signed-off-by: Varadarajan Narayanan > Signed-off-by: Matthew McClintock > --- I was asked to review this, to make sure that Linus wasn't waiting for my ack or anything. But now I see that you have not added him as a recipient. Please make sure to run ./scripts/get_maintainer.pl and pick appropriate recipients in the future. > > v3 > - update example with actual values from dts > - add missing pins 71-99 > - drop many functions and stick to basic functionality > I hope to see a patch later on adding all those functions back, but that's fine with me. [..] > +static struct platform_driver ipq4019_pinctrl_driver = { > + .driver = { > + .name = "ipq4019-pinctrl", > + .owner = THIS_MODULE, platform_drivers do get their .owner assigned by platform_drive_register(). > + .of_match_table = ipq4019_pinctrl_of_match, > + }, > + .probe = ipq4019_pinctrl_probe, > + .remove = msm_pinctrl_remove, > +}; Part of the .owner above you have my Acked-by: Bjorn Andersson @Linus, this still applies and builds cleanly on linux-next. Would you be okay dropping the owner assignment while applying this patch? Regards, Bjorn