* Re: New IIO/counter driver [not found] <CAKKE0ZHmODzhvjPNJFVgT2cF_F=f2kNKr5K_CGP+0XgA5XZokw@mail.gmail.com> @ 2019-01-07 13:55 ` Patrick Havelange 2019-01-08 0:46 ` William Breathitt Gray 1 sibling, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Patrick Havelange @ 2019-01-07 13:55 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-iio Hello, I'm in the process of adding a new IIO/counter driver, however I also saw that there was a work in progress to have a separate counter subsystem ( https://marc.info/?l=linux-iio&m=153974167727206 ). But it seems there is no recent progress on it. What is the state of those patches ? Is it still interesting to develop the driver as an IIO/counter , or should I use already that new subsystem ? Best Regards, Patrick Havelange. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: New IIO/counter driver [not found] <CAKKE0ZHmODzhvjPNJFVgT2cF_F=f2kNKr5K_CGP+0XgA5XZokw@mail.gmail.com> @ 2019-01-08 0:46 ` William Breathitt Gray 2019-01-08 0:46 ` William Breathitt Gray 1 sibling, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: William Breathitt Gray @ 2019-01-08 0:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Patrick Havelange, Jonathan Cameron, gregkh Cc: linux-iio, fabrice.gasnier, benjamin.gaignard, linux-kernel, linux-arm-kernel, devicetree, knaack.h, lars, pmeerw, akpm On Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 02:45:37PM +0100, Patrick Havelange wrote: > Hello, > > I'm in the process of adding a new IIO/counter driver, however I also saw > that there was a work in progress to have a separate counter subsystem ( > https://marc.info/?l=linux-iio&m=153974167727206 ). But it seems there is > no recent progress on it. > What is the state of those patches ? Is it still interesting to develop the > driver as an IIO/counter , or should I use already that new subsystem ? > > Best Regards, > > Patrick Havelange. Hello, I am still open to merging this patchset and maintaining the Counter subsystem. However, I took the lack of response for my latest submission to indicate a loss of interest in this patchset's approach. If there are still people who want this, I can rebase and resend this patchset for submission; the past few versions have primarily been code clarity and documentation changes so I believe the core design itself is somewhat stable now. Just let me know how best to proceed and I shall be happy to oblige -- whether to continue maintaining this patchset or to drop this design in favor of improving the existing IIO Counter code in the kernel. I'll CC those from the patchset submission to keep them in the loop. Sincerely, William Breathitt Gray ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: New IIO/counter driver @ 2019-01-08 0:46 ` William Breathitt Gray 0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: William Breathitt Gray @ 2019-01-08 0:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Patrick Havelange, Jonathan Cameron, gregkh Cc: devicetree, lars, benjamin.gaignard, linux-iio, linux-kernel, pmeerw, knaack.h, akpm, fabrice.gasnier, linux-arm-kernel On Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 02:45:37PM +0100, Patrick Havelange wrote: > Hello, > > I'm in the process of adding a new IIO/counter driver, however I also saw > that there was a work in progress to have a separate counter subsystem ( > https://marc.info/?l=linux-iio&m=153974167727206 ). But it seems there is > no recent progress on it. > What is the state of those patches ? Is it still interesting to develop the > driver as an IIO/counter , or should I use already that new subsystem ? > > Best Regards, > > Patrick Havelange. Hello, I am still open to merging this patchset and maintaining the Counter subsystem. However, I took the lack of response for my latest submission to indicate a loss of interest in this patchset's approach. If there are still people who want this, I can rebase and resend this patchset for submission; the past few versions have primarily been code clarity and documentation changes so I believe the core design itself is somewhat stable now. Just let me know how best to proceed and I shall be happy to oblige -- whether to continue maintaining this patchset or to drop this design in favor of improving the existing IIO Counter code in the kernel. I'll CC those from the patchset submission to keep them in the loop. Sincerely, William Breathitt Gray _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: New IIO/counter driver 2019-01-08 0:46 ` William Breathitt Gray @ 2019-01-08 10:57 ` Benjamin Gaignard -1 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Benjamin Gaignard @ 2019-01-08 10:57 UTC (permalink / raw) To: William Breathitt Gray Cc: Patrick Havelange, Jonathan Cameron, Greg Kroah-Hartman, devicetree, Lars-Peter Clausen, Benjamin GAIGNARD, linux-iio, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Peter Meerwald-Stadler, Hartmut Knaack, Andrew Morton, Fabrice Gasnier, Linux ARM Le mar. 8 janv. 2019 à 01:46, William Breathitt Gray <vilhelm.gray@gmail.com> a écrit : > > On Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 02:45:37PM +0100, Patrick Havelange wrote: > > Hello, > > > > I'm in the process of adding a new IIO/counter driver, however I also saw > > that there was a work in progress to have a separate counter subsystem ( > > https://marc.info/?l=linux-iio&m=153974167727206 ). But it seems there is > > no recent progress on it. > > What is the state of those patches ? Is it still interesting to develop the > > driver as an IIO/counter , or should I use already that new subsystem ? > > > > Best Regards, > > > > Patrick Havelange. > > Hello, > > I am still open to merging this patchset and maintaining the Counter > subsystem. However, I took the lack of response for my latest > submission to indicate a loss of interest in this patchset's approach. > If there are still people who want this, I can rebase and resend this > patchset for submission; the past few versions have primarily been code > clarity and documentation changes so I believe the core design itself is > somewhat stable now. > > Just let me know how best to proceed and I shall be happy to oblige -- > whether to continue maintaining this patchset or to drop this design in > favor of improving the existing IIO Counter code in the kernel. > > I'll CC those from the patchset submission to keep them in the loop. I confirm that I still interested to get those patches merged. Regards, Benjamin > > Sincerely, > > William Breathitt Gray > > _______________________________________________ > linux-arm-kernel mailing list > linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel -- Benjamin Gaignard Graphic Study Group Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: New IIO/counter driver @ 2019-01-08 10:57 ` Benjamin Gaignard 0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Benjamin Gaignard @ 2019-01-08 10:57 UTC (permalink / raw) To: William Breathitt Gray Cc: devicetree, Lars-Peter Clausen, Benjamin GAIGNARD, linux-iio, Patrick Havelange, Hartmut Knaack, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linux ARM, Peter Meerwald-Stadler, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Andrew Morton, Fabrice Gasnier, Jonathan Cameron Le mar. 8 janv. 2019 à 01:46, William Breathitt Gray <vilhelm.gray@gmail.com> a écrit : > > On Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 02:45:37PM +0100, Patrick Havelange wrote: > > Hello, > > > > I'm in the process of adding a new IIO/counter driver, however I also saw > > that there was a work in progress to have a separate counter subsystem ( > > https://marc.info/?l=linux-iio&m=153974167727206 ). But it seems there is > > no recent progress on it. > > What is the state of those patches ? Is it still interesting to develop the > > driver as an IIO/counter , or should I use already that new subsystem ? > > > > Best Regards, > > > > Patrick Havelange. > > Hello, > > I am still open to merging this patchset and maintaining the Counter > subsystem. However, I took the lack of response for my latest > submission to indicate a loss of interest in this patchset's approach. > If there are still people who want this, I can rebase and resend this > patchset for submission; the past few versions have primarily been code > clarity and documentation changes so I believe the core design itself is > somewhat stable now. > > Just let me know how best to proceed and I shall be happy to oblige -- > whether to continue maintaining this patchset or to drop this design in > favor of improving the existing IIO Counter code in the kernel. > > I'll CC those from the patchset submission to keep them in the loop. I confirm that I still interested to get those patches merged. Regards, Benjamin > > Sincerely, > > William Breathitt Gray > > _______________________________________________ > linux-arm-kernel mailing list > linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel -- Benjamin Gaignard Graphic Study Group Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: New IIO/counter driver 2019-01-08 10:57 ` Benjamin Gaignard @ 2019-01-08 11:01 ` Fabrice Gasnier -1 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Fabrice Gasnier @ 2019-01-08 11:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Benjamin Gaignard, William Breathitt Gray Cc: Patrick Havelange, Jonathan Cameron, Greg Kroah-Hartman, devicetree, Lars-Peter Clausen, Benjamin GAIGNARD, linux-iio, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Peter Meerwald-Stadler, Hartmut Knaack, Andrew Morton, Linux ARM On 1/8/19 11:57 AM, Benjamin Gaignard wrote: > Le mar. 8 janv. 2019 à 01:46, William Breathitt Gray > <vilhelm.gray@gmail.com> a écrit : >> >> On Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 02:45:37PM +0100, Patrick Havelange wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> I'm in the process of adding a new IIO/counter driver, however I also saw >>> that there was a work in progress to have a separate counter subsystem ( >>> https://marc.info/?l=linux-iio&m=153974167727206 ). But it seems there is >>> no recent progress on it. >>> What is the state of those patches ? Is it still interesting to develop the >>> driver as an IIO/counter , or should I use already that new subsystem ? >>> >>> Best Regards, >>> >>> Patrick Havelange. >> >> Hello, >> >> I am still open to merging this patchset and maintaining the Counter >> subsystem. However, I took the lack of response for my latest >> submission to indicate a loss of interest in this patchset's approach. >> If there are still people who want this, I can rebase and resend this >> patchset for submission; the past few versions have primarily been code >> clarity and documentation changes so I believe the core design itself is >> somewhat stable now. >> >> Just let me know how best to proceed and I shall be happy to oblige -- >> whether to continue maintaining this patchset or to drop this design in >> favor of improving the existing IIO Counter code in the kernel. >> >> I'll CC those from the patchset submission to keep them in the loop. > > I confirm that I still interested to get those patches merged. > > Regards, > Benjamin Hi, Same for me, Regards, Fabrice >> >> Sincerely, >> >> William Breathitt Gray >> >> _______________________________________________ >> linux-arm-kernel mailing list >> linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org >> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel > > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: New IIO/counter driver @ 2019-01-08 11:01 ` Fabrice Gasnier 0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Fabrice Gasnier @ 2019-01-08 11:01 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Benjamin Gaignard, William Breathitt Gray Cc: devicetree, Lars-Peter Clausen, Benjamin GAIGNARD, linux-iio, Patrick Havelange, Hartmut Knaack, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Linux ARM, Peter Meerwald-Stadler, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Andrew Morton, Jonathan Cameron On 1/8/19 11:57 AM, Benjamin Gaignard wrote: > Le mar. 8 janv. 2019 à 01:46, William Breathitt Gray > <vilhelm.gray@gmail.com> a écrit : >> >> On Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 02:45:37PM +0100, Patrick Havelange wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> I'm in the process of adding a new IIO/counter driver, however I also saw >>> that there was a work in progress to have a separate counter subsystem ( >>> https://marc.info/?l=linux-iio&m=153974167727206 ). But it seems there is >>> no recent progress on it. >>> What is the state of those patches ? Is it still interesting to develop the >>> driver as an IIO/counter , or should I use already that new subsystem ? >>> >>> Best Regards, >>> >>> Patrick Havelange. >> >> Hello, >> >> I am still open to merging this patchset and maintaining the Counter >> subsystem. However, I took the lack of response for my latest >> submission to indicate a loss of interest in this patchset's approach. >> If there are still people who want this, I can rebase and resend this >> patchset for submission; the past few versions have primarily been code >> clarity and documentation changes so I believe the core design itself is >> somewhat stable now. >> >> Just let me know how best to proceed and I shall be happy to oblige -- >> whether to continue maintaining this patchset or to drop this design in >> favor of improving the existing IIO Counter code in the kernel. >> >> I'll CC those from the patchset submission to keep them in the loop. > > I confirm that I still interested to get those patches merged. > > Regards, > Benjamin Hi, Same for me, Regards, Fabrice >> >> Sincerely, >> >> William Breathitt Gray >> >> _______________________________________________ >> linux-arm-kernel mailing list >> linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org >> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel > > > _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: New IIO/counter driver 2019-01-08 11:01 ` Fabrice Gasnier (?) @ 2019-01-12 17:51 ` Jonathan Cameron -1 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Jonathan Cameron @ 2019-01-12 17:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Fabrice Gasnier Cc: Benjamin Gaignard, William Breathitt Gray, Patrick Havelange, Greg Kroah-Hartman, devicetree, Lars-Peter Clausen, Benjamin GAIGNARD, linux-iio, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Peter Meerwald-Stadler, Hartmut Knaack, Andrew Morton, Linux ARM On Tue, 8 Jan 2019 12:01:57 +0100 Fabrice Gasnier <fabrice.gasnier@st.com> wrote: > On 1/8/19 11:57 AM, Benjamin Gaignard wrote: > > Le mar. 8 janv. 2019 à 01:46, William Breathitt Gray > > <vilhelm.gray@gmail.com> a écrit : > >> > >> On Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 02:45:37PM +0100, Patrick Havelange wrote: > >>> Hello, > >>> > >>> I'm in the process of adding a new IIO/counter driver, however I also saw > >>> that there was a work in progress to have a separate counter subsystem ( > >>> https://marc.info/?l=linux-iio&m=153974167727206 ). But it seems there is > >>> no recent progress on it. > >>> What is the state of those patches ? Is it still interesting to develop the > >>> driver as an IIO/counter , or should I use already that new subsystem ? > >>> > >>> Best Regards, > >>> > >>> Patrick Havelange. > >> > >> Hello, > >> > >> I am still open to merging this patchset and maintaining the Counter > >> subsystem. However, I took the lack of response for my latest > >> submission to indicate a loss of interest in this patchset's approach. > >> If there are still people who want this, I can rebase and resend this > >> patchset for submission; the past few versions have primarily been code > >> clarity and documentation changes so I believe the core design itself is > >> somewhat stable now. > >> > >> Just let me know how best to proceed and I shall be happy to oblige -- > >> whether to continue maintaining this patchset or to drop this design in > >> favor of improving the existing IIO Counter code in the kernel. > >> > >> I'll CC those from the patchset submission to keep them in the loop. > > > > I confirm that I still interested to get those patches merged. > > > > Regards, > > Benjamin > Hi, > > Same for me, In a more abstract fashion (I don't have any hardware of this type!) I'm still keen for the counter subsystem to go in. Hopefully, if Greg or anyone else wants to take a detailed look they will have time this cycle to do so. I was pretty happy with the last version I read through. There will always be things to improved, but as long a we are happy with the userspace inteface, the little things can happen later. Jonathan > > Regards, > Fabrice > >> > >> Sincerely, > >> > >> William Breathitt Gray > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> linux-arm-kernel mailing list > >> linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org > >> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel > > > > > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: New IIO/counter driver @ 2019-01-12 17:51 ` Jonathan Cameron 0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Jonathan Cameron @ 2019-01-12 17:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Fabrice Gasnier Cc: Benjamin Gaignard, William Breathitt Gray, Patrick Havelange, Greg Kroah-Hartman, devicetree, Lars-Peter Clausen, Benjamin GAIGNARD, linux-iio, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Peter Meerwald-Stadler, Hartmut Knaack, Andrew Morton, Linux ARM On Tue, 8 Jan 2019 12:01:57 +0100 Fabrice Gasnier <fabrice.gasnier@st.com> wrote: > On 1/8/19 11:57 AM, Benjamin Gaignard wrote: > > Le mar. 8 janv. 2019 à 01:46, William Breathitt Gray > > <vilhelm.gray@gmail.com> a écrit : > >> > >> On Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 02:45:37PM +0100, Patrick Havelange wrote: > >>> Hello, > >>> > >>> I'm in the process of adding a new IIO/counter driver, however I also saw > >>> that there was a work in progress to have a separate counter subsystem ( > >>> https://marc.info/?l=linux-iio&m=153974167727206 ). But it seems there is > >>> no recent progress on it. > >>> What is the state of those patches ? Is it still interesting to develop the > >>> driver as an IIO/counter , or should I use already that new subsystem ? > >>> > >>> Best Regards, > >>> > >>> Patrick Havelange. > >> > >> Hello, > >> > >> I am still open to merging this patchset and maintaining the Counter > >> subsystem. However, I took the lack of response for my latest > >> submission to indicate a loss of interest in this patchset's approach. > >> If there are still people who want this, I can rebase and resend this > >> patchset for submission; the past few versions have primarily been code > >> clarity and documentation changes so I believe the core design itself is > >> somewhat stable now. > >> > >> Just let me know how best to proceed and I shall be happy to oblige -- > >> whether to continue maintaining this patchset or to drop this design in > >> favor of improving the existing IIO Counter code in the kernel. > >> > >> I'll CC those from the patchset submission to keep them in the loop. > > > > I confirm that I still interested to get those patches merged. > > > > Regards, > > Benjamin > Hi, > > Same for me, In a more abstract fashion (I don't have any hardware of this type!) I'm still keen for the counter subsystem to go in. Hopefully, if Greg or anyone else wants to take a detailed look they will have time this cycle to do so. I was pretty happy with the last version I read through. There will always be things to improved, but as long a we are happy with the userspace inteface, the little things can happen later. Jonathan > > Regards, > Fabrice > >> > >> Sincerely, > >> > >> William Breathitt Gray > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> linux-arm-kernel mailing list > >> linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org > >> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel > > > > > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: New IIO/counter driver @ 2019-01-12 17:51 ` Jonathan Cameron 0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread From: Jonathan Cameron @ 2019-01-12 17:51 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Fabrice Gasnier Cc: devicetree, Lars-Peter Clausen, Benjamin GAIGNARD, linux-iio, Patrick Havelange, Peter Meerwald-Stadler, Hartmut Knaack, William Breathitt Gray, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Benjamin Gaignard, Greg Kroah-Hartman, Andrew Morton, Linux ARM On Tue, 8 Jan 2019 12:01:57 +0100 Fabrice Gasnier <fabrice.gasnier@st.com> wrote: > On 1/8/19 11:57 AM, Benjamin Gaignard wrote: > > Le mar. 8 janv. 2019 à 01:46, William Breathitt Gray > > <vilhelm.gray@gmail.com> a écrit : > >> > >> On Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 02:45:37PM +0100, Patrick Havelange wrote: > >>> Hello, > >>> > >>> I'm in the process of adding a new IIO/counter driver, however I also saw > >>> that there was a work in progress to have a separate counter subsystem ( > >>> https://marc.info/?l=linux-iio&m=153974167727206 ). But it seems there is > >>> no recent progress on it. > >>> What is the state of those patches ? Is it still interesting to develop the > >>> driver as an IIO/counter , or should I use already that new subsystem ? > >>> > >>> Best Regards, > >>> > >>> Patrick Havelange. > >> > >> Hello, > >> > >> I am still open to merging this patchset and maintaining the Counter > >> subsystem. However, I took the lack of response for my latest > >> submission to indicate a loss of interest in this patchset's approach. > >> If there are still people who want this, I can rebase and resend this > >> patchset for submission; the past few versions have primarily been code > >> clarity and documentation changes so I believe the core design itself is > >> somewhat stable now. > >> > >> Just let me know how best to proceed and I shall be happy to oblige -- > >> whether to continue maintaining this patchset or to drop this design in > >> favor of improving the existing IIO Counter code in the kernel. > >> > >> I'll CC those from the patchset submission to keep them in the loop. > > > > I confirm that I still interested to get those patches merged. > > > > Regards, > > Benjamin > Hi, > > Same for me, In a more abstract fashion (I don't have any hardware of this type!) I'm still keen for the counter subsystem to go in. Hopefully, if Greg or anyone else wants to take a detailed look they will have time this cycle to do so. I was pretty happy with the last version I read through. There will always be things to improved, but as long a we are happy with the userspace inteface, the little things can happen later. Jonathan > > Regards, > Fabrice > >> > >> Sincerely, > >> > >> William Breathitt Gray > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> linux-arm-kernel mailing list > >> linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org > >> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel > > > > > > _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2019-01-12 17:52 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <CAKKE0ZHmODzhvjPNJFVgT2cF_F=f2kNKr5K_CGP+0XgA5XZokw@mail.gmail.com>
2019-01-07 13:55 ` New IIO/counter driver Patrick Havelange
2019-01-08 0:46 ` William Breathitt Gray
2019-01-08 0:46 ` William Breathitt Gray
2019-01-08 10:57 ` Benjamin Gaignard
2019-01-08 10:57 ` Benjamin Gaignard
2019-01-08 11:01 ` Fabrice Gasnier
2019-01-08 11:01 ` Fabrice Gasnier
2019-01-12 17:51 ` Jonathan Cameron
2019-01-12 17:51 ` Jonathan Cameron
2019-01-12 17:51 ` Jonathan Cameron
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.