From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: jbrunet@baylibre.com (Jerome Brunet)
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2017 12:23:07 +0200
Subject: [PATCH v3 0/6] irqchip: meson: add support for the gpio
 interrupt controller
In-Reply-To: <8742df56-42ef-bf70-0ec1-9e8418ec0063@arm.com>
References: <20170615161804.32658-1-jbrunet@baylibre.com>
 <8742df56-42ef-bf70-0ec1-9e8418ec0063@arm.com>
Message-ID: <1497608587.3086.42.camel@baylibre.com>
To: linus-amlogic@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linus-amlogic.lists.infradead.org

On Fri, 2017-06-16 at 09:46 +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 15/06/17 17:17, Jerome Brunet wrote:
> > This patch series adds support for the GPIO interrupt controller found on
> > Amlogic's meson SoC families.
> > 
> > Unlike what the name suggests, this controller is not part of the SoC
> > GPIO subsystem. It is a separate controller from which can watch almost
> > all pads of the SoC and generate and interrupt from it. Some pins, which
> > are not part of the public datasheet, don't seem to have this capability
> > though.
> > 
> > Hardware wise, the controller is a 256 to 8 router with filtering block
> > to select edge or level input and the polarity of the signal.??As there
> > we can't setup the filtring to generate a signal on both the high and low
> > polarity, there is no easy way to support IRQ_TYPE_EDGE_BOTH at the
> > moment
> > 
> > The number of interrupt line routed to the controller depends on the SoC,
> > and essentially the number of GPIO available on the SoC.
> > 
> > This series has been tested on Amlogic S905-P200 board with the front
> > panel power button.
> > 
> > This work is derived from the previous work of Carlo Caione [1].
> 
> [...]
> 
> So we have two competing series, all based on the same stuff. I must say
> this is rather disappointing that people can't manage to collaborate and
> work towards a common goal.
> 
> I'm going to review the irqchip part, because I've done that on Heiner's
> series as well, but that's where I'm going to stop.
> 
> Heiner, Jerome: please sort this out between yourselves *BEFORE* sending
> any other patch series. This is wasting everybody's time, both yours and
> mine (and frankly, this a rather rare commodity these days).

I really don't enjoy doing things that way, and I understand the feeling.

I also spent a lot of time reviewing Heiner's patches, only to see comments
repeatedly ignored. You know well how time consuming those reviews are. 

After 7 versions, some comments have been taken into account, some are still
completely ignored, even with Kevin and Neil's warnings. I wouldn't have posted
a competing if things were not stuck.

Like you, I have things far more interesting to do than duplicating efforts, and
I sincerely hope better collaboration can be achieved.

Anyway, thanks for your time and sorry for the mess. 

Cheers
Jerome

> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 	M.