Re: [RFC PATCH 00/13] Add support for Tegra DPAUX pinctrl

[Thierry Reding <thierry.reding-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1714 bytes --]

On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 06:56:11PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 01:03:34PM +0100, Jon Hunter wrote:
> > The Display Port Auxiliary (DPAUX) channel pads can be shared with an
> > internal I2C controller. Add pinctrl support for these pads so that the
> > I2C controller can request and use these pads.
> > 
> > Jon Hunter (13):
> >   drm/tegra: Clean-up if probing DPAUX fails
> >   drm/tegra: Add helper functions for setting up DPAUX pads
> >   dt-bindings: drm/tegra: Update DPAUX documentation
> >   drm/tegra: Add sor-safe clock for DPAUX on Tegra210
> >   drm/tegra: Prepare DPAUX for supporting generic PM domains
> >   pinctrl: pinconf: Add generic helper function for freeing mappings
> >   dt-bindings: i2c: Add support for 'i2c-bus' subnode
> >   i2c: core: Add support for 'i2c-bus' subnode
> >   dt-bindings: drm/tegra: Add DPAUX pinctrl documentation
> >   drm/tegra: Add pinctrl support for DPAUX
> >   arm64: tegra: Add SOR power-domain node
> >   arm64: tegra: Add sor-safe clock to DPAUX binding
> >   arm64: tegra: Add DPAUX pinctrl bindings
> 
> There aren't really any hard dependencies between all these patches,
> right? I think the worst case would be if the arm64 DTS changes get
> merged before the I2C core changes (i2c-bus node support), then the
> I2C core will complain about the pinmux nodes, but that wouldn't be
> fatal, or have any bad side-effects, right?

Oh wait... there's the pinctrl helper function that is a build-
dependency. Linus, would you be okay if I took that through the
drm-tegra tree along with the DPAUX driver change, and provide a
stable branch for you to resolve conflicts against if needed?

Thierry

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