Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 22 May 2022 22:09:35 +0200 | From | Wolfram Sang <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v5 08/10] i2c: npcm: Remove own slave addresses 2:10 |
| |
Hi Tali,
> So when we encounter a deadlock with this spinlock we decided to get rid of this > unused feature and get both a stable fix for the issue + performance benefits. > We work closely with all our customers so we know that this HW > feature is useless to them.
Okay, fair enough. Thanks for the detailed explanation!
> > Why do we keep this array if we drop the support? > > > This array represents the HW so we left it as-is. But I agree it can > be shortened to one\two.
Would be nice, I think.
> OK, we will move the last two to a separate patch. BTW, this change > appears in the title as well.
Yes, but I still think it should be a seperate change.
> But now I'm not sure: if you already apply for-next patches [1:7], and > we change patch [8:10] > do we need to re-submit [1:7]?
Nope, they are already in linux-next. They seemed like good fixes even without the support for the new SoC, so I applied them right away. I hope this was okay.
> Thanks, Wolfram, for your review! > Much appreciated
You are welcome :)
Happy hacking,
Wolfram
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |