From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Message-ID: <4F15C733.8000404@free-electrons.com> Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 20:08:35 +0100 From: Maxime Ripard MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Arnd Bergmann CC: linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD , Nicolas Ferre , Patrice Vilchez , Thomas Petazzoni , Jonathan Cameron , Marek Vasut Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] ARM: AT91: IIO: Add AT91 ADC driver. References: <1326749786-13035-1-git-send-email-maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> <1326749786-13035-3-git-send-email-maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> <201201171735.06166.arnd@arndb.de> In-Reply-To: <201201171735.06166.arnd@arndb.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 List-ID: Hi Arnd, On 17/01/2012 18:35, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Monday 16 January 2012, Maxime Ripard wrote: >> Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard >> >> Cc: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD >> Cc: Nicolas Ferre >> Cc: Patrice Vilchez >> Cc: Thomas Petazzoni >> Cc: Jonathan Cameron >> Cc: Marek Vasut >> Cc: Arnd Bergmann > > I think I reviewed this driver before, but I don't remember any of the > details I may have complained about. I assume everything was fixed, > since the driver looks good in this version ;-) You did, and as far as I remember, you did not complained much. but actually, I've rewritten a large enough part of this driver to make the Acked-by you gave at the time at best outdated. That's why I dropped all the SoB and friends to a Cc. I mentionned it in the cover letter, but I forgot to Cc you one that one too, my bad... > Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann > > Two general comments: > > * Please add a changeset description (i.e. thetext above your > Signed-off-by: line) for every patch you do. Just read a few > dozen patches that get posted to lkml to get a feeling for > what would be useful to have in there. For a new driver, it > would be helpful to know what hardware uses this driver and > what the device does there. Ok, will do. > * Over time, we will get stricter in requiring device tree > bindings for new platform devices, to replace platform_data > where appropriate. It's not required yet, but it would be nice > to describe the long-term plan in submissions that add new > platform_data but no device tree bindings. The main point of rewriting a part of it was exactly to make the transition to device-tree and single kernel image easier when the time comes. Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux development, consulting, training and support. http://free-electrons.com From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com (Maxime Ripard) Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 20:08:35 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 2/3] ARM: AT91: IIO: Add AT91 ADC driver. In-Reply-To: <201201171735.06166.arnd@arndb.de> References: <1326749786-13035-1-git-send-email-maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> <1326749786-13035-3-git-send-email-maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> <201201171735.06166.arnd@arndb.de> Message-ID: <4F15C733.8000404@free-electrons.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi Arnd, On 17/01/2012 18:35, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Monday 16 January 2012, Maxime Ripard wrote: >> Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard >> >> Cc: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD >> Cc: Nicolas Ferre >> Cc: Patrice Vilchez >> Cc: Thomas Petazzoni >> Cc: Jonathan Cameron >> Cc: Marek Vasut >> Cc: Arnd Bergmann > > I think I reviewed this driver before, but I don't remember any of the > details I may have complained about. I assume everything was fixed, > since the driver looks good in this version ;-) You did, and as far as I remember, you did not complained much. but actually, I've rewritten a large enough part of this driver to make the Acked-by you gave at the time at best outdated. That's why I dropped all the SoB and friends to a Cc. I mentionned it in the cover letter, but I forgot to Cc you one that one too, my bad... > Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann > > Two general comments: > > * Please add a changeset description (i.e. thetext above your > Signed-off-by: line) for every patch you do. Just read a few > dozen patches that get posted to lkml to get a feeling for > what would be useful to have in there. For a new driver, it > would be helpful to know what hardware uses this driver and > what the device does there. Ok, will do. > * Over time, we will get stricter in requiring device tree > bindings for new platform devices, to replace platform_data > where appropriate. It's not required yet, but it would be nice > to describe the long-term plan in submissions that add new > platform_data but no device tree bindings. The main point of rewriting a part of it was exactly to make the transition to device-tree and single kernel image easier when the time comes. Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux development, consulting, training and support. http://free-electrons.com