Re: [PATCH v5 1/3] mfd: Add support for Cherry Trail Dollar Cove TI PMIC

[Lee Jones]

On Tue, 05 Sep 2017, Takashi Iwai wrote:

> On Tue, 05 Sep 2017 10:10:49 +0200,
> Lee Jones wrote:
> > 
> > On Tue, 05 Sep 2017, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > 
> > > On Tue, 05 Sep 2017 09:24:51 +0200,
> > > Lee Jones wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > On Mon, 04 Sep 2017, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > This patch adds the MFD driver for Dollar Cove (TI version) PMIC with
> > > > > ACPI INT33F5 that is found on some Intel Cherry Trail devices.
> > > > > The driver is based on the original work by Intel, found at:
> > > > >   https://github.com/01org/ProductionKernelQuilts
> > > > > 
> > > > > This is a minimal version for adding the basic resources.  Currently,
> > > > > only ACPI PMIC opregion and the external power-button are used.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=193891
> > > > > Reviewed-by: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@xxxxxxx>
> > > > > ---
> > > > > v4->v5:
> > > > > * Minor coding-style fixes suggested by Lee
> > > > > * Put GPL text
> > > > > v3->v4:
> > > > > * no change for this patch
> > > > > v2->v3:
> > > > > * Rename dc_ti with chtdc_ti in all places
> > > > > * Driver/kconfig renames accordingly
> > > > > * Added acks by Andy and Mika
> > > > > v1->v2:
> > > > > * Minor cleanups as suggested by Andy
> > > > > 
> > > > >  drivers/mfd/Kconfig                   |  13 +++
> > > > >  drivers/mfd/Makefile                  |   1 +
> > > > >  drivers/mfd/intel_soc_pmic_chtdc_ti.c | 184 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > >  3 files changed, 198 insertions(+)
> > > > >  create mode 100644 drivers/mfd/intel_soc_pmic_chtdc_ti.c
> > > > 
> > > > For my own reference:
> > > >   Acked-for-MFD-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > 
> > > Thanks!
> > > 
> > > Now the question is how to deal with these.  It's no critical things,
> > > so I'm OK to postpone for 4.15.  OTOH, it's really a new
> > > device-specific stuff, thus it can't break anything else, and it'd be
> > > fairly safe to add it for 4.14 although it's at a bit late stage.
> > 
> > Yes, you are over 2 weeks late for v4.14.  It will have to be v4.15.
> 
> OK, I'll ring your bells again once when 4.15 development is opened.
> 
> 
> > > IMO, it'd be great if you can carry all stuff through MFD tree; or
> > > create an immutable branch (again).  But how to handle it, when to do
> > > it, It's all up to you guys.
> > 
> > If there aren't any build dependencies between the patches, each of
> > the patches should be applied through their own trees.  What are the
> > build-time dependencies?  Are there any?
> 
> No, there is no strict build-time dependency.  It's just that I don't
> see it nice to have a commit for a dead code, partly for testing
> purpose and partly for code consistency.  But if this makes
> maintenance easier, I'm happy with that, too, of course.

There won't be any dead code.  All of the subsystem trees are pulled
into -next [0] where the build bots can operate on the patches as a
whole.

[0] git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org â Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog