From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jonathan Cameron Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] iio: adc: aspeed: Deassert reset in probe Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2017 16:03:18 +0000 Message-ID: <20171119160318.41d7e85a@archlinux> References: <20171031021203.18248-1-joel@jms.id.au> <20171102144932.00001e17@huawei.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20171102144932.00001e17-hv44wF8Li93QT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-iio-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Jonathan Cameron Cc: Joel Stanley , Philipp Zabel , Rick Altherr , Rob Herring , Hartmut Knaack , Lars-Peter Clausen , Peter Meerwald-Stadler , linux-iio-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, devicetree , LKML List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2 Nov 2017 14:49:32 +0000 Jonathan Cameron wrote: > On Wed, 1 Nov 2017 10:15:32 +1030 > Joel Stanley wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 10:28 PM, Philipp Zabel > > wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 3:12 AM, Joel Stanley > > > wrote: > > >> The ASPEED SoC must deassert a reset in order to use the ADC > > >> peripheral. > > >> > > >> The device tree bindings are updated to document the resets > > >> phandle, and the example is updated to match what is expected for > > >> both the reset and clock phandle. Note that the bindings should > > >> have always had the reset controller, as the hardware is unusable > > >> without it. > > >> > > >> Signed-off-by: Joel Stanley > > > > > > It is unfortunate that this has to break DT (theoretical) backwards > > > compatibility, but given that the old bindings never worked, > > > this is better than to pretend a required reset is optional. > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Philipp Zabel > > > > Thanks. I agree that it's unfortunate; this has been my first time > > working on an ARM SoC and there were few things we could have done > > better in hindsight. > > > > I've got similar patches for the ASPEED hwmon pwm/tach driver, and the > > i2c driver that I'll send out now. > > > > Thanks for the review. > > > > Cheers, > > > > Joel > Hi Joel, > > IIO is closed for this cycle anyway now. > Otherwise, series looks good. > > Will pick up when back with my main PC as traveling for this week and > next. Forgot to ask, do you want me to pick this up as a fix? Also does it make sense to tag it for stable? If not I can pick it up for the coming cycle. Given the code changes are small and well isolated I'm happy to do any of the 3 options, it really depends on whether the rest of the platform works well enough to be worth rushing these through? Jonathan > > Thanks, > > Jonathan > > -- > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" > > in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org > > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in > the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html