Re: [PATCH v4 2/6] mfd: MT6397: Add support for PMIC MT6397 MFD
From: Lee Jones
Date: Tue Jan 20 2015 - 10:33:24 EST
On Tue, 20 Jan 2015, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> Hi Lee,
>
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 02:43:09PM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> > On Fri, 26 Dec 2014, Flora Fu wrote:
> >
> > > Add core files for MT6397 MFD driver.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Flora Fu <flora.fu@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/mfd/Kconfig | 10 +
> > > drivers/mfd/Makefile | 1 +
> > > drivers/mfd/mt6397-core.c | 94 +++++++++
> > > include/linux/mfd/mt6397/core.h | 23 +++
> > > include/linux/mfd/mt6397/registers.h | 362 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > 5 files changed, 490 insertions(+)
> > > create mode 100644 drivers/mfd/mt6397-core.c
> > > create mode 100644 include/linux/mfd/mt6397/core.h
> > > create mode 100644 include/linux/mfd/mt6397/registers.h
> >
> > Looks okay.
> >
> > I assume there are dependancies on this patch. What are they?
> >
> > How would you like this set to be handled?
>
> This patch is outdated, I sent an updated series today (you are on Cc).
Okay, thanks.
> There are no compile time dependencies to the PMIC wrapper, but without
> it the mfd part is pretty useless. I prefer to keep the series together
> and merge it through arm-soc, but I would be fine with merging it
> through mfd aswell.
Yes, everyone feels the same about their cross-subsystem patch-sets. ;)
If there are build-time dependencies I am always happy to take sets
in via MFD and send out pull-requests to other subsystem Maintainers;
however, if there are only run-time dependencies I prefer to save
everyone the hassle and have them go in via their own subsystems.
--
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org â Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/