From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mika Westerberg Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND 1/2] i2c: prepare runtime PM support for I2C client devices Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2013 14:24:06 +0300 Message-ID: <20130911112406.GB7393@intel.com> References: <1378733679-19500-1-git-send-email-mika.westerberg@linux.intel.com> <3397524.g9aUWuArnm@vostro.rjw.lan> <20130910213522.GG29403@sirena.org.uk> <2029393.u6DaKBPszu@vostro.rjw.lan> <522FC0DC.9030708@intel.com> <20130911095552.GI29403@sirena.org.uk> <20130911110543.GA7393@intel.com> <20130911111409.GO29403@sirena.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130911111409.GO29403@sirena.org.uk> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Mark Brown Cc: Aaron Lu , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, Wolfram Sang , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Lv Zheng , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 12:14:09PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 02:05:43PM +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote: > > > I'll also look into converting the existing I2C client drivers to use this > > method. One question, though, is it better to have the conversion in the > > same patch that introduces the I2C core runtime PM change or as a separate > > patch? > > In theory it ought to be part of the same patch but in practice a brief > bit of bisection breakage on a single branch is probably worth the ease > of review from my point of view, others may disagree though. OK, I'll keep them separate, unless there are objections. > Like I say I think you'll need to convert SPI at the same time due to the > devices with both buses sharing code. Yes, I'm looking into that :)