From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from co202.xi-lite.net ([149.6.83.202]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.76 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1SVj7W-0000dr-RI for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Sat, 19 May 2012 12:50:55 +0000 Date: Sat, 19 May 2012 14:50:18 +0200 From: Ivan Djelic To: Afzal Mohammed Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] GPMC NAND isr using standard API Message-ID: <20120519125018.GA2407@parrot.com> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Cc: "dedekind1@gmail.com" , "tony@atomide.com" , "artem.bityutskiy@linux.intel.com" , "linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" , "dwmw2@infradead.org" List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 03:38:09PM +0100, Afzal Mohammed wrote: > Hi Tony, Artem, > > This series creates a fictitious GPMC interrupt chip and provide the > clients with interrupts that could be handled using standard APIs. > This helps in removing the requirement of driver of peripheral > connected to GPMC having the knowledge about GPMC. The only user is > OMAP NAND driver, it has also been modified to use interrupts provided > by imaginary GPMC chip. > > This series has a dependency on [2], while [2] has a trivial > dependency on [1]. > > With this series plus [1,2], GPMC driver conversion which is going to > happen shortly will not create noticable effect outside of > arch/arm/*omap*/. > > If this series along with [1,2] can be taken in for 3.5, ripples felt > by MTD drivers upon GPMC driver conversion would be minimal. Hi Afzal, I tried to take your series of patches, but I had issues with the first [1] (I did not try the others): it depends on the following patch, which is not in the l2-mtd-2.6 tree: http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-omap@vger.kernel.org/msg68258.html and it does not apply anyway to l2-mtd-2.6 because of (at least) the following patches: http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2012-April/040631.html http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2012-April/040724.html So, do you think you could rebase your series on l2-mtd-2.6 ? And maybe merge the 3 series into a single one, if they have circular dependencies ? Thanks, -- Ivan [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-omap@vger.kernel.org/msg68581.html [2] http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-omap@vger.kernel.org/msg68652.html From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ivan Djelic Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] GPMC NAND isr using standard API Date: Sat, 19 May 2012 14:50:18 +0200 Message-ID: <20120519125018.GA2407@parrot.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Return-path: Received: from co202.xi-lite.net ([149.6.83.202]:44167 "EHLO co202.xi-lite.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755894Ab2ESMuz (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 May 2012 08:50:55 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Afzal Mohammed Cc: "tony@atomide.com" , "dwmw2@infradead.org" , "artem.bityutskiy@linux.intel.com" , "dedekind1@gmail.com" , "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org" On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 03:38:09PM +0100, Afzal Mohammed wrote: > Hi Tony, Artem, > > This series creates a fictitious GPMC interrupt chip and provide the > clients with interrupts that could be handled using standard APIs. > This helps in removing the requirement of driver of peripheral > connected to GPMC having the knowledge about GPMC. The only user is > OMAP NAND driver, it has also been modified to use interrupts provided > by imaginary GPMC chip. > > This series has a dependency on [2], while [2] has a trivial > dependency on [1]. > > With this series plus [1,2], GPMC driver conversion which is going to > happen shortly will not create noticable effect outside of > arch/arm/*omap*/. > > If this series along with [1,2] can be taken in for 3.5, ripples felt > by MTD drivers upon GPMC driver conversion would be minimal. Hi Afzal, I tried to take your series of patches, but I had issues with the first [1] (I did not try the others): it depends on the following patch, which is not in the l2-mtd-2.6 tree: http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-omap@vger.kernel.org/msg68258.html and it does not apply anyway to l2-mtd-2.6 because of (at least) the following patches: http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2012-April/040631.html http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mtd/2012-April/040724.html So, do you think you could rebase your series on l2-mtd-2.6 ? And maybe merge the 3 series into a single one, if they have circular dependencies ? Thanks, -- Ivan [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-omap@vger.kernel.org/msg68581.html [2] http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-omap@vger.kernel.org/msg68652.html