[lkml]   [2012]   [May]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/2] mfd: MAX8997: Support irq domain for Maxim MAX8997
    On 05/11/2012 08:52 AM, Greg KH wrote:

    > On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 08:45:23AM +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
    >> On 05/11/2012 03:20 AM, Greg KH wrote:
    >>> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 07:54:48PM +0900, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
    >>>> But, I posted following patchset related to MAX8997 driver.
    >>>> This patchset support Extcon framework in extcon-max8997 driver to
    >>>> control external connector instead of max8997-muic driver. So, first
    >>>> patch add MAX8997 extcon driver(drivers/extcon/extcon-max8997.c) and
    >>>> last patch remove old MAX8997 muic driver(drivers/misc/max8997-muic.c).
    >>>> -
    >>>> This patchset was applied in below git repository of Greg Kroah-Hartman.
    >>>> -;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/driver-core-next
    >>>> I think that this patchset should be applied on the git repository
    >>>> of Greg Kroah-Hartman to remove possible conflict issue when merged.
    >>> That's fine with me, should the MFD maintainer have been copied on this
    >>> to get his signed-off-by on it?
    >> I knew that first patch written by Thomas Abraham has been already
    >> confirmed ack message from MFD maintainer(Samuel Ortiz
    >> <>). You can check it on first patch and below git
    >> repository of Mark Brown.
    > Ok, but why didn't you cc: him and everyone else who acked and
    > signed-off on that patch?

    it is my mistake. I should have added maintainer related to first patch
    as you said.
    I will resend this patchset to all of people related to it now.

    >> The below patch has occurred build break, so it was reverted by Mark
    >> Brown. And then I did post this patchset with bug fix.
    > So does that mean this one is ok, but the older one isn't?
    > confused, what exactly should I do here?

    Sorry, I have not sufficient explanation about history of patchset.

    The below was written by Thomas Abraham and it was applied on
    regulator.git repository.;a=commit;h=98d8618af37728f6e18e84110ddb99987b47dd12

    But, this patch had occurred build break, it was reported by Stephen
    Rothwell when build max8997-muic driver(drivers/misc/max8997-muic.c) and
    then this patch was reverted by Mark Brown. You can check reverted patch
    on below patch.;a=commit;h=82b719b11fd750188c125078ad6a6c0d23219dfb

    Then, I posted patchset ,which is based on patch written by Thomas Abraham,
    to add support irq domain for Max MAX8997 interrupts with bug fix.

    I had to modify max8997-muic driver to avoid build break, But previously
    I added extcon-max8997 driver and remove old max8997-muic

    So, I suggested that this patchset should be applied on the git reposity
    of Greg
    to remove possible conflict issue when merged because old max8997-muic
    driver(drivers/misc/max8997-muic.c) is existed on regulator.git of Mark

    I am so sorry about obscure explanation of patchset history.

    Best Regards,
    Chanwoo Choi

     \ /
      Last update: 2012-05-11 03:21    [W:0.070 / U:8.172 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site