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

[Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1248 bytes --]


> 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 that is the same for any maintainer
> (whose job description does not explicitly include being maintainer).

Well, since I became the I2C maintainer in late 2012, i2c-mux was always
low-bandwidth:

$ git log --pretty=oneline v3.2.. -- drivers/i2c/muxes/ drivers/i2c/i2c-mux.c | wc -l
72

And your patch series is already bigger than what was accepted in the
last year altogether :) I understand the uncertainty feeling about this
step; however, I truly think it is not much work. It is a niche -
though, one I'd like to have supported by your expertise.

> the mux update. The main commonality of the demux and the preexisting muxes
> seems to be that the name includes "mux" and that it is all about i2c. Agreed?

Yes, and because they are quite different, I wasn't sure if it a) is not
affected at all or b) totally breaks the design. Glad to hear it is a).

Thanks again, looks like we have a roadmap now for getting this series
in \o/

   Wolfram


[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]