lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Sep]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v5 1/3] mfd: Add support for Cherry Trail Dollar Cove TI PMIC
On Thu, 07 Sep 2017, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:

> On Thursday, September 7, 2017 12:53:48 PM CEST Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Thu, 07 Sep 2017, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, 05 Sep 2017 10:54:49 +0200,
> > > Lee Jones wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, 05 Sep 2017, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Tue, 05 Sep 2017 10:10:49 +0200,
> > > > > Lee Jones wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, 05 Sep 2017, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Tue, 05 Sep 2017 09:24:51 +0200,
> > > > > > > Lee Jones wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Mon, 04 Sep 2017, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > This patch adds the MFD driver for Dollar Cove (TI version) PMIC with
> > > > > > > > > ACPI INT33F5 that is found on some Intel Cherry Trail devices.
> > > > > > > > > The driver is based on the original work by Intel, found at:
> > > > > > > > > https://github.com/01org/ProductionKernelQuilts
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > This is a minimal version for adding the basic resources. Currently,
> > > > > > > > > only ACPI PMIC opregion and the external power-button are used.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=193891
> > > > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com>
> > > > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>
> > > > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > > > v4->v5:
> > > > > > > > > * Minor coding-style fixes suggested by Lee
> > > > > > > > > * Put GPL text
> > > > > > > > > v3->v4:
> > > > > > > > > * no change for this patch
> > > > > > > > > v2->v3:
> > > > > > > > > * Rename dc_ti with chtdc_ti in all places
> > > > > > > > > * Driver/kconfig renames accordingly
> > > > > > > > > * Added acks by Andy and Mika
> > > > > > > > > v1->v2:
> > > > > > > > > * Minor cleanups as suggested by Andy
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > drivers/mfd/Kconfig | 13 +++
> > > > > > > > > drivers/mfd/Makefile | 1 +
> > > > > > > > > drivers/mfd/intel_soc_pmic_chtdc_ti.c | 184 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > > > > > > 3 files changed, 198 insertions(+)
> > > > > > > > > create mode 100644 drivers/mfd/intel_soc_pmic_chtdc_ti.c
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > For my own reference:
> > > > > > > > Acked-for-MFD-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Now the question is how to deal with these. It's no critical things,
> > > > > > > so I'm OK to postpone for 4.15. OTOH, it's really a new
> > > > > > > device-specific stuff, thus it can't break anything else, and it'd be
> > > > > > > fairly safe to add it for 4.14 although it's at a bit late stage.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yes, you are over 2 weeks late for v4.14. It will have to be v4.15.
> > > > >
> > > > > OK, I'll ring your bells again once when 4.15 development is opened.
> > > >
> > > > Please don't. Just collect all the Acks you have received and sent
> > > > out the set again changing [PATCH] for [RESEND]. Only if there
> > > > haven't been any code changes of course.
> > >
> > > You seem to have applied the patches in some branch, but still do I
> > > need to resend the whole patches?
> >
> > That's up to the Platform Maintainers.
> >
> > Since the MFD and ACPI are applied, you do not need to resend those.
> >
> > > BTW, was patch 2/3 applied? I miss your notification mail.
> >
> > Patch 2 needs to be applied into the Platform tree.
>
> Actually, that's drivers/platform/x86/ so it falls under
> X86 PLATFORM DRIVERS and it has already been ACKed by Andy who is
> one of the maintainers of that.
>
> Andy, Darren, can patch [2/3] from this series go in via the MFD tree?

... without an immutable branch. Which also means all changes to this
file due for v4.15 would have to come in via the MFD tree too.

This is sub optimal IMHO. I'd rather it was fed through the proper
tree(s), so we can continue our normal flow for subsequent changes.

--
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-09-07 13:19    [W:0.093 / U:33.920 seconds]
©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site