From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jonathan Cameron Subject: Re: New IIO/counter driver Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2019 17:51:59 +0000 Message-ID: <20190112175159.3dac7a70@archlinux> References: <20190108004632.GA3247@icarus> <8b2bb569-a6e0-25ec-740d-48083b30fe60@st.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <8b2bb569-a6e0-25ec-740d-48083b30fe60@st.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Fabrice Gasnier Cc: Benjamin Gaignard , William Breathitt Gray , Patrick Havelange , Greg Kroah-Hartman , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Lars-Peter Clausen , Benjamin GAIGNARD , linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, Linux Kernel Mailing List , Peter Meerwald-Stadler , Hartmut Knaack , Andrew Morton , Linux ARM List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 8 Jan 2019 12:01:57 +0100 Fabrice Gasnier wrote: > On 1/8/19 11:57 AM, Benjamin Gaignard wrote: > > Le mar. 8 janv. 2019 =C3=A0 01:46, William Breathitt Gray > > a =C3=A9crit : =20 > >> > >> On Mon, Jan 07, 2019 at 02:45:37PM +0100, Patrick Havelange wrote: =20 > >>> 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 subsyste= m ( > >>> https://marc.info/?l=3Dlinux-iio&m=3D153974167727206 ). But it seems = there is > >>> no recent progress on it. > >>> What is the state of those patches ? Is it still interesting to devel= op the > >>> driver as an IIO/counter , or should I use already that new subsystem= ? > >>> > >>> Best Regards, > >>> > >>> Patrick Havelange. =20 > >> > >> 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. = =20 > >=20 > > I confirm that I still interested to get those patches merged. > >=20 > > Regards, > > Benjamin =20 > Hi, >=20 > 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 >=20 > 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 =20 > >=20 > >=20 > > =20