Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 7 Apr 2024 19:50:39 +0200 | From | Wolfram Sang <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v0 00/14] Make I2C terminology more inclusive for I2C Algobit and consumers |
| |
Hi Easwar,
> Sorry, got excited. :) There were drivers I'd been part of that I specifically > wanted to fixup, but then the scope grew to other users of algobit.
Well, you got some positive feedback, so that is good.
> > It is true that I changed quite some controller drivers within the i2c > > realm. I did this to gain experience. As you also noticed quite some > > questions came up. We need to agree on answers first. And once we are > > happy with the answers we found, then IMO we can go outside of the i2c > > realm and send patches to other subsystems referencing agreed > > precedence. I intentionally did not go outside i2c yet. Since your > > patches are already there, you probably want to foster them until they > > are ready for inclusion. > > Sorry, I don't quite follow what you mean by foster in this context. Are > you asking me to hold off on merging the series, or to follow through on > getting it merged?
I think they are your patches, so this is up to you to decide. With "foster", I meant you keep working on them until everyone is happy. I haven't looked at the drivers you modify. I can't tell if they can be converted right away or if they use a lot of I2C API calls, so that it makes sense to wait until the core is converted. I trust you to decide this.
Happy hacking,
Wolfram [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |