Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Patch to add mioa701 glue for voltage regulation | From | Liam Girdwood <> | Date | Tue, 28 Apr 2009 11:38:06 +0100 |
| |
On Tue, 2009-04-28 at 09:13 +0800, Eric Miao wrote: > On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 5:11 AM, Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@free.fr> wrote: > > Liam Girdwood <lrg@slimlogic.co.uk> writes: > > > >> On Thu, 2009-04-23 at 20:30 +0200, Robert Jarzmik wrote: > >>> Hi Mark and Eric, > >>> > >>> I have that patch which adds voltage regulation definitions to mioa701 > >>> board. The trick is, this patch depends on two others : > >>> > >>> - one which will be merged through Mark's regulator tree. > >>> This one is mandatory as a compiling dependency exists through include files. > >>> > >>> - one which will be merge through Eric pxa tree. > >>> This is the cpufreq one, and has a "very weak" dependency, as only the > >>> "vcc_core" name _is_ the dependency. > >>> > >>> I think the easiest way to solve the compiling dependency > >>> (include/linux/regulator.max1586.h) is to make that patch go through regulator > >>> tree as well for linux-next, even if it's arm machine specific, don't you ? > >>> > >> > >> If fine with this going through regulator providing I get an ACK from > >> Eric. > > > > Eric, > > > > Since Liam took the max1586 regulator through his tree, would you state if you > > ack that please ? > > > > I'd really be happy to. However, my concern is that this patch modifies > arch/arm/mach-pxa/mioa701.c _only_, so it would be better to go through > my tree so that I can manage all the potential merge conflicts. There are > several other changes to mioa701.c and I expect the content in > arch/arm/mach-pxa/* to be heavily changed due to recent addition > of pxa168/pxa910 support. > > The issue of dependency, as was always before, can be resolved by > putting this into 'pending' and monitoring the status of merge window > before sending the PULL request. > > Liam, > > Sounds OK to you?
Eric,
I think it probably better going through your PXA tree now (to avoid any conflicts). I had originally thought this patch was part of a larger series that mostly touched regulator.
Robert,
Could you resubmit to Eric. Mark or I will ack. Please remove the max1586_v6_info until it has some consumers.
Thanks
Liam
| |