Re: [RFC][PATCH] regmap: Add reg_sequence for use with multi_reg_write / register_patch

2015-06-04 Thread Mark Brown
On Thu, Jun 04, 2015 at 03:21:19PM +0100, Nariman Poushin wrote: > On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 07:15:13PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > You need to squash the changes in since they break bisection if handled > > separately. It would be better to do this by having a separate patch to > > add the newly

Re: [RFC][PATCH] regmap: Add reg_sequence for use with multi_reg_write / register_patch

2015-06-04 Thread Nariman Poushin
On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 07:15:13PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 10:20:12AM +0100, Nariman Poushin wrote: > > > it be accepted), should I: > > - Squash all the updates in to this patch (I suppose the benefit > > there is that we don't break the kernel build from

Re: [RFC][PATCH] regmap: Add reg_sequence for use with multi_reg_write / register_patch

2015-06-04 Thread Mark Brown
On Thu, Jun 04, 2015 at 03:21:19PM +0100, Nariman Poushin wrote: On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 07:15:13PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: You need to squash the changes in since they break bisection if handled separately. It would be better to do this by having a separate patch to add the newly named

Re: [RFC][PATCH] regmap: Add reg_sequence for use with multi_reg_write / register_patch

2015-06-04 Thread Nariman Poushin
On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 07:15:13PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 10:20:12AM +0100, Nariman Poushin wrote: it be accepted), should I: - Squash all the updates in to this patch (I suppose the benefit there is that we don't break the kernel build from one patch

Re: [RFC][PATCH] regmap: Add reg_sequence for use with multi_reg_write / register_patch

2015-06-02 Thread Mark Brown
On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 10:20:12AM +0100, Nariman Poushin wrote: > it be accepted), should I: > - Squash all the updates in to this patch (I suppose the benefit > there is that we don't break the kernel build from one patch > to the other) You need to squash the changes in

Re: [RFC][PATCH] regmap: Add reg_sequence for use with multi_reg_write / register_patch

2015-06-02 Thread Mark Brown
On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 10:20:12AM +0100, Nariman Poushin wrote: it be accepted), should I: - Squash all the updates in to this patch (I suppose the benefit there is that we don't break the kernel build from one patch to the other) You need to squash the changes in

[RFC][PATCH] regmap: Add reg_sequence for use with multi_reg_write / register_patch

2015-06-01 Thread Nariman Poushin
Support write sequences / patches with specified delays (in microseconds) after some (or all) writes. Logically separate reg_default from the new reg_sequence structure (which has an additional delay_us member) as the reg_default tables can run in to the thousands (for modern devices) and the

[RFC][PATCH] regmap: Add reg_sequence for use with multi_reg_write / register_patch

2015-06-01 Thread Nariman Poushin
Support write sequences / patches with specified delays (in microseconds) after some (or all) writes. Logically separate reg_default from the new reg_sequence structure (which has an additional delay_us member) as the reg_default tables can run in to the thousands (for modern devices) and the