From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Warren Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] i2c: tegra: Bug fixes, cleanups and M_NOSTART support Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2012 10:05:47 -0600 Message-ID: <4FD768DB.3070403@wwwdotorg.org> References: <1338901800-23968-1-git-send-email-ldewangan@nvidia.com> <4FCE3078.1030008@wwwdotorg.org> <4FCE3CD8.8060502@nvidia.com> <20120612085040.GC9230@pengutronix.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20120612085040.GC9230-bIcnvbaLZ9MEGnE8C9+IrQ@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-tegra-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Wolfram Sang Cc: Laxman Dewangan , "khali-PUYAD+kWke1g9hUCZPvPmw@public.gmane.org" , "ben-linux-elnMNo+KYs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org" , "olof-nZhT3qVonbNeoWH0uzbU5w@public.gmane.org" , "linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , "linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , "linux-tegra-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" List-Id: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org On 06/12/2012 02:50 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote: > On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 10:37:36PM +0530, Laxman Dewangan wrote: >> On Tuesday 05 June 2012 09:44 PM, Stephen Warren wrote: >>> On 06/05/2012 07:09 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote: >>>> This patch series having the: - Handling of late register >>>> write due to Tegra PPSB design. - support for I2C_M_NOSTART - >>>> Use devm_* for all allocation. >>> The series, >>> >>> Acked-by: Stephen Warren >>> >>> Note that patch 4 touches context adjacent to Prashant's "i2c: >>> tegra: Add clk_prepare/clk_unprepare" patch, which I hope to >>> take through the Tegra tree since it's a requirement for the >>> Tegra common clock conversion. I don't think this will cause >>> any significant conflict, but perhaps it's worth resolving it >>> explicitly. > > Is it really a requirement? Just wondering if it will cause > problems, if Prashant's patch goes in via I2C after arm-soc has > been merged. I am fine with simply acking the patch, though. AIUI, the clk_prepare patch is certainly a requirement for Tegra's conversion to common clock; I believe that a clk_enable() without a preceding clk_prepare() will fail since it's an invalid call sequence. I'm not 100% sure yet, but I hope Prashant will post patches to convert Tegra to common clock in time for 3.6, so having all the driver clk_prepare in a branch prior to the common clock conversion is required. >>> Wolfram, perhaps we should put these 4 patches and Prashan'ts >>> into their own topic branch so that you can merge it into the >>> I2C tree, and I can merge it into the Tegra tree too? Or, I can >>> take everything through Tegra if you want, and ack it. > > Laxman's patches should really go via I2C, I think. Can't we just > fix the conflict in arm-soc? Yes, Laxman's changes should be able to go through I2C without a problem. We can try this out without any cross-merged topic branches and try resolving in arm-soc for now. If there turns out to be an issue, we can always rebase the Tegra and/or I2C for-next branches to fix it up.