From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marcin Niestroj Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/5] mfd: tps65217: Add power button as subdevice Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 09:41:57 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20160620105056.25843-1-m.niestroj@grinn-global.com> <20160620105056.25843-5-m.niestroj@grinn-global.com> <20160830090329.GD1661@dell> <9fafa9b0-cc45-6fe9-ddb9-5c933064261c@grinn-global.com> <20160830095034.GI1661@dell> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20160830095034.GI1661@dell> Sender: linux-input-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Lee Jones Cc: Tony Lindgren , Sebastian Reichel , Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov , David Woodhouse , Rob Herring , Pawel Moll , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-input@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Grygorii Strashko List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 30.08.2016 11:50, Lee Jones wrote: > On Tue, 30 Aug 2016, Marcin Niestroj wrote: > >> On 30.08.2016 11:03, Lee Jones wrote: >>> On Mon, 29 Aug 2016, Marcin Niestroj wrote: >>> >>>> ping >>> >>> Don't do that! >>> >>> If you think the patch hasn't attracted attention in >2 weeks, then >>> it's probably slipped through the gaps and you need to send a >>> [RESEND]. >> >> Clear. >> >>> >>> However ... >>> >>>> On 20.06.2016 12:50, Marcin Niestroj wrote: >>>>> Add tps65217 power buttor subdevice with assigned IRQ resources. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Marcin Niestroj >>>>> Acked-by: Lee Jones >>> >>> This patch has a maintainer Ack, so why are you pinging? >> >> Because I didn't see it applied anywhere and there were no new >> comments, so I thought it slipped somewhere. >> >> So my question is: what happens with the patch after maintainer Ack? >> Are we still waiting for some comments from the community? Do I still >> need to worry, that the patch might slipped? What is author's role now? > > Since you sent the patches as a set, it is assumed there are some > dependencies between them, or they are at least in some way related. > To that end, it is normal for Maintainers (especially for me as the > MFD Maintainer, since there often some complex ties into the leaf > driver's changes) to wait until *all* of the patches have either been > accepted or have acquired an Ack of their own to proceed. > > I believe we are still waiting on other patches to be reviewed, no? I've just noticed, that patch 5 was only partially Acked. I will send a RESEND. However patch 2 is already in mainline. Should I contain this patch or remove it from the patch set? Additionally patch 3 has been queued into power-supply's -next branch. > >>>>> --- >>>>> Depends on patch 1 in series >>>>> >>>>> Changes v1 -> v4: none >>>>> >>>>> drivers/mfd/tps65217.c | 10 ++++++++++ >>>>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/tps65217.c b/drivers/mfd/tps65217.c >>>>> index 41b5d59..57c8741 100644 >>>>> --- a/drivers/mfd/tps65217.c >>>>> +++ b/drivers/mfd/tps65217.c >>>>> @@ -38,6 +38,10 @@ static struct resource charger_resources[] = { >>>>> DEFINE_RES_IRQ_NAMED(TPS65217_IRQ_USB, "USB"), >>>>> }; >>>>> >>>>> +static struct resource pb_resources[] = { >>>>> + DEFINE_RES_IRQ_NAMED(TPS65217_IRQ_PB, "PB"), >>>>> +}; >>>>> + >>>>> struct tps65217_irq { >>>>> int mask; >>>>> int interrupt; >>>>> @@ -122,6 +126,12 @@ static struct mfd_cell tps65217s[] = { >>>>> .resources = charger_resources, >>>>> .of_compatible = "ti,tps65217-charger", >>>>> }, >>>>> + { >>>>> + .name = "tps65217-pwrbutton", >>>>> + .num_resources = ARRAY_SIZE(pb_resources), >>>>> + .resources = pb_resources, >>>>> + .of_compatible = "ti,tps65217-pwrbutton", >>>>> + }, >>>>> }; >>>>> >>>>> static irqreturn_t tps65217_irq_thread(int irq, void *data) >>>>> >>>> >>> >> > -- Marcin Niestroj