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

[Lee Jones]

On Thu, 07 Sep 2017, Takashi Iwai wrote:

> On Thu, 07 Sep 2017 12:53:48 +0200,
> Lee Jones wrote:
> > 
> > On Thu, 07 Sep 2017, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> > 
> > > On Tue, 05 Sep 2017 10:54:49 +0200,
> > > Lee Jones wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > 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.
> > > > 
> > > > Please don't.  Just collect all the Acks you have received and sent
> > > > out the set again changing [PATCH] for [RESEND].  Only if there
> > > > haven't been any code changes of course. 
> > >   
> > > You seem to have applied the patches in some branch, but still do I
> > > need to resend the whole patches?
> > 
> > That's up to the Platform Maintainers.
> > 
> > Since the MFD and ACPI are applied, you do not need to resend those.
> > 
> > > BTW, was patch 2/3 applied?  I miss your notification mail.
> > 
> > Patch 2 needs to be applied into the Platform tree.
> > 
> > Since there are no deps between the patches, they should be applied
> > into their own trees (as previously discussed).  I only applied the
> > ACPI patch because Rafael asked me nicely.  Normally this should have
> > gone in separately too.
> 
> Andy already expressed his preference about the patch going through
> MFD tree in the v5 thread.  Below is the excerpt.

If Andy is happy for me to apply the patch without an immutable
branch, then I'll take it.  But as I've already said, this it
non-optimal.

There is no reason why it can't be taken in via the Platform tree.
Nothing depends on it and it depends on nothing, since it is new
code.

> On Thu, 24 Aug 2017 13:47:04 +0200,
> Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > 
> > On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 12:45 PM, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On Thu, 24 Aug 2017 11:20:04 +0200,
> > > Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 11:11 AM, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >> > This provides a new input driver for supporting the power button on
> > >> > Dollar Cove TI PMIC, found on Cherrytrail-based devices.
> > >> > The patch is based on the original work by Intel, found at:
> > >> >   https://github.com/01org/ProductionKernelQuilts
> > >> >
> > >> > Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=193891
> > >> > Signed-off-by: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@xxxxxxx>
> > >>
> > >> Are you going to submit it via MFD?
> > >
> > > I really don't mind who takes what.  The driver codes are small, so it
> > > should be OK to go through a single tree, presumably MFD, if all
> > > people agree.
> > >
> > > OTOH, if Lee can prepare an immutable branch, other two can go via
> > > other trees, too.
> > >
> > > What do you guys think better?
> > 
> > As a co-maintainer of PDx86 I prefer to go with MFD or whatever first
> > patch is related to.
> > 

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