Hi Wolfram,
Le 09/12/2012 12:16 PM, Wolfram Sang a écrit :
On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 10:03:59AM +0200, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
On 09/12/2012 08:42 AM, [email protected] :
From: Ludovic Desroches <[email protected]>
Hi,
This set of patches is based on Nikolaus at91_i2c driver.
Changes:
v3:
- only put multi-drive lines in the if...else statement (suggested
by Warner Losh)
Hi Wolfram,
As said by Ludovic, this series goes on top of Nikolaus' one.
My Acked-by is already set on this one, so I think that I have nothing
more to do ;-)
BTW, in case you need help to sort all this, do not hesitate to contact
us... we can setup a git tree for this...
I think I am fine. Patches look good. I wondered a bit about first
removing the old driver, then adding the new one with regard to
bisectability. But as the old driver depends on BROKEN, I think this is
OK to do.
One thing I'd like to make, though. I'd like to squash the following
patches into one:
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c: add new driver
i2c: at91: use managed resources
i2c: at91: add warning about transmission issues for some devices
i2c: at91: use an id table for SoC dependent parameters
It is especially the last patch I am mostly interested in. The id_table
approach is what I like, while the original id_entry mechanism looks
fishy. I'd was good for reviewing to have the patches split like this;
yet for hitting mainline, I'd prefer to have the driver proper on first
occasion. I already did the squashing in a test-branch and the result
looks good to me.
Nikolaus, Ludovic: Are you fine with this?
No problem on my side.
Regards
Ludovic
Thanks,
Wolfram
_______________________________________________
devicetree-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss
