Re: [PATCH v3 0/8] i2c mux cleanup and locking update

2016-03-07 Thread Wolfram Sang
> My offer is going to be this, I'll look after any unforeseen future problems > caused by this rework, and I can be the i2c-mux maintainer. But if being Yay, thanks a lot! > the i2c-mux maintainer turns out to be a huge time-sink, there is no way I > can stay on in the long run. But I guess

Re: [PATCH v3 0/8] i2c mux cleanup and locking update

2016-03-07 Thread Peter Rosin
On 2016-03-05 19:29, Wolfram Sang wrote: > >> Perhaps it's one to let sit into at least the next cycle (and get some >> testing >> on those media devices if we can) but, whilst it is fiddly the gains seen in >> individual drivers (like the example Peter put in response to the V4 series) >> make

Re: [PATCH v3 0/8] i2c mux cleanup and locking update

2016-03-05 Thread Wolfram Sang
> Perhaps it's one to let sit into at least the next cycle (and get some testing > on those media devices if we can) but, whilst it is fiddly the gains seen in > individual drivers (like the example Peter put in response to the V4 series) > make it look worthwhile to me. Also, whilst the

Re: [PATCH v3 0/8] i2c mux cleanup and locking update

2016-03-05 Thread Jonathan Cameron
On 02/03/16 17:29, Wolfram Sang wrote: > On Fri, Jan 08, 2016 at 04:04:48PM +0100, Peter Rosin wrote: >> From: Peter Rosin >> >> Hi! >> >> [doing a v3 even if there is no "big picture" feedback yet, but >> previous versions has bugs that make them harder to test than >> needed,

RE: [PATCH v3 0/8] i2c mux cleanup and locking update

2016-03-02 Thread Peter Rosin
Wolfram Sang wrote: > On Fri, Jan 08, 2016 at 04:04:48PM +0100, Peter Rosin wrote: > > > > Hi! > > > > [doing a v3 even if there is no "big picture" feedback yet, but > > previous versions has bugs that make them harder to test than > > needed, and testing is very much desired] > > > > I have

Re: [PATCH v3 0/8] i2c mux cleanup and locking update

2016-03-02 Thread Wolfram Sang
On Fri, Jan 08, 2016 at 04:04:48PM +0100, Peter Rosin wrote: > From: Peter Rosin > > Hi! > > [doing a v3 even if there is no "big picture" feedback yet, but > previous versions has bugs that make them harder to test than > needed, and testing is very much desired] > > I have