[PATCH 05/16] thermal: mvebu: Fix valid check for thermal register

[Jason Cooper]

On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 04:57:09PM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 11:24:00AM -0400, Jason Cooper wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 12:16:10PM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote:
> > > Hi Jason,
> > > 
> > > On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 10:35:39AM -0400, Jason Cooper wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 07:36:26PM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote:
> > > > > The correct value is obtain by first shifting the register by the offset,
> > > > > later applying the valid mask and finally invert the result.
> > > > > This check was lacking an extra parenthesis to be strictly correct.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Ezequiel Garcia <ezequiel.garcia at free-electrons.com>
> > > > > ---
> > > > >  drivers/thermal/mvebu_thermal.c |    4 ++--
> > > > >  1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > > 
> > > > For the next version of this series, could you please put this fix first
> > > > in the series?  In this state, it can't be applied to v3.9-rcX, nor
> > > > -stable.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Given we're still discussing the aproach of this patchset.
> > > I think I prefer to send the fixes now, not as part of the
> > > current series but as independent patches.
> > > 
> > > What do you think?
> > 
> > I agree.
> > 
> 
> I have a question about this though: Who should pick patches for
> drivers/thermal/{dove,kirkwood,mvebu} ? You or Zhang?

That's up to Zhang.  If he has a lot of changes going on this cycle,
he'll probably want to take them through his tree.  However, if he
doesn't, and we have a lot of stuff depending on it (the rest of your
series), he'll probably be ok with Ack'ing it and letting us take it
through our tree.

thx,

Jason.