Re: [PATCH v2] mfd: syscon: Add syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle_optional() function.

[Matthias Brugger]

On 17/11/2020 13:37, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Nov 2020, Matthias Brugger wrote:
>
> > Hi Lee,
> >
> > On 13/11/2020 11:19, Lee Jones wrote:
> > > On Tue, 10 Nov 2020, Enric Balletbo i Serra wrote:
> > >
> > > > This adds syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle_optional() function to get an
> > > > optional regmap.
> > > >
> > > > It behaves the same as syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle() except where
> > > > there is no regmap phandle. In this case, instead of returning -ENODEV,
> > > > the function returns NULL. This makes error checking simpler when the
> > > > regmap phandle is optional.
> > > >
> > > > Suggested-by: Nicolas Boichat <drinkcat@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Enric Balletbo i Serra <enric.balletbo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Reviewed-by: Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > >
> > > > Changes in v2:
> > > > - Add Matthias r-b tag.
> > > > - Add the explanation from the patch description to the code.
> > > > - Return NULL instead of -ENOTSUPP when regmap helpers are not enabled.
> > > >
> > > >    drivers/mfd/syscon.c       | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
> > > >    include/linux/mfd/syscon.h | 11 +++++++++++
> > > >    2 files changed, 29 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > Applied, thanks.
> >
> > I've a series [1] that's based on this patch, could you provide a stable
> > branch for it, so that I can take the series.
>
> Why can't you base it off of for-mfd-next?
>
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/lee/mfd.git/log/?h=for-mfd-next

I can do that, if you are willing to not overwrite the commit history. In my 
case it can happen that I drop a patch from my for-next branch as I realize that 
it e.g. breaks something. I think that's the reason why normally a stable branch 
get's created, as the commit ID won't change although you change the commit 
history of your for-mfd-next branch.

If you want to go the route for me rebasing my tree on top of for-mfd-next then 
I'd like to have at least a stable tag, so that it will be easier to provide the 
pull-request later on. Would that be a compromise?

Regards,
Matthias