From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Wolfram Sang Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/8] i2c mux cleanup and locking update Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 11:23:09 +0100 Message-ID: <20160307102309.GA1405@katana> References: <1452265496-22475-1-git-send-email-peda@lysator.liu.se> <20160302172904.GC5439@katana> <56DB1C07.4040008@kernel.org> <20160305182934.GA1394@katana> <56DD3E1E.5040003@lysator.liu.se> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="jI8keyz6grp/JLjh" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <56DD3E1E.5040003@lysator.liu.se> Sender: linux-media-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Peter Rosin Cc: Jonathan Cameron , Peter Rosin , Peter Korsgaard , Guenter Roeck , Hartmut Knaack , Lars-Peter Clausen , Peter Meerwald , Antti Palosaari , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Rob Herring , Frank Rowand , Grant Likely , Srinivas Pandruvada , Adriana Reus , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Hans Verkuil , Nicholas Mc Guire , Olli Salonen , linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org --jI8keyz6grp/JLjh Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline > 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 --jI8keyz6grp/JLjh Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJW3VaNAAoJEBQN5MwUoCm22/IP/1RlgbCkTAdpLAodKwAhH57d ctOvoI7DNgYrKaTcy03vefZirGa79BUwkobZs4LOvXfDoIYCn/+UN3s0ykVJYJyR gBbGwiUoSDkHgrWI1XuP8vkg2QTG2M5W6n9XffXsdLQSUlwysLkrNICKJ+tDY0Fd FRH/QjQx/HLXPqjRTOKizLFXjCYeJVm9a7z3KHE3EH2QiC2Rl7tM2P+IPHpPK15V xOLf4ey5KszkMUrWxH4/ISngNJ2mj7agyQMEgSvFuLdo2SwRZCtjlpNXbvsv27Vw EcXaLPc40iFJzCrhpQb+cXaEXhn9yEPQLe/ZEO5NkGO5Q2JM11/uS/cGvjEi1Q1G xW9f3xbvdA3/Alku/ToqTtM5pAjFcmAf1QqacyirqJCPIHUs2MdYuXv9rkSAEm+u KRX6CST3E/hu/sC2qR9vLUXueaHnf14hpoeNLDIRKzxRkC5VHBEt1LBV8SHLrs/L JWpLkQOgBIkUaAFast6TTsr67BFOKaGYtvS8OmpnE4+nr0NGai2U+NbXie+pdB0Q 4wi1WE6e03DKB91wexmHIWFG71okoGwE/+dOHEaDORXe8LiiQ98SwkWAuxcUtP/n Wk24wIWXX5IQqXpjXqTzAA+Pvt1YM1NoIU615joFlBfRUihKxnWWHi92Do7iHpPZ xCtR0hIAVdtg/nlLDj2y =2jMg -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --jI8keyz6grp/JLjh--