From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hans de Goede Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/7] i2c: designware-baytrail: Take punit lock on bus acquire Date: Sun, 15 Jan 2017 16:11:03 +0100 Message-ID: <84cabe1f-1129-19b9-f0ed-6ec5f189bb29@redhat.com> References: <20170108134427.8392-1-hdegoede@redhat.com> <20170108134427.8392-4-hdegoede@redhat.com> <20170112184545.sejbzawnesu6zj5i@ninjato> <5aa8a3ab-a527-1f3b-0cf6-92fd4691ddc8@redhat.com> <20170115114529.jxwcadse23gdykx5@ninjato> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:49926 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751174AbdAOPLI (ORCPT ); Sun, 15 Jan 2017 10:11:08 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20170115114529.jxwcadse23gdykx5@ninjato> Sender: linux-i2c-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org To: Wolfram Sang Cc: Daniel Vetter , Jani Nikula , =?UTF-8?B?VmlsbGUgU3lyasOkbMOk?= , Jarkko Nikula , Len Brown , Andy Shevchenko , intel-gfx , dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, Mika Westerberg , Takashi Iwai , "russianneuromancer @ ya . ru" , linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org Hi, On 15-01-17 12:45, Wolfram Sang wrote: > Hi Hans, > >> So Wolfram, what is the plan with these ? As said they are necessary >> for the 2 i2c patches in this patch-set, so do you want the >> entire set of 8 i2c patches to go through an other tree to avoid >> inter tree dependencies ? > > Thanks for the heads up. So, my plan was that I send a pull request for > 4.10 any minute now, and start pulling in patches for 4.11 based on > shiny new rc4 from tomorrow on. And your series would have been one of > the fist to get merged because I think it is ready. > > Reading this though, my feeling is now that it should be merged via some > other tree so you can get these nasty issues fixed without too many > dependencies. An immutable branch for me to pull in would be great, > though. > > Makes sense? Sounds fine to me, step one is to get consensus on how to deal with coordinating the kernel directly accessing to the pmic-i2c-bus vs punit accesses which also end up needing to use the same i2c-bus from the punit side. Once I've a patch-set everyone likes I will start talking to people to coordinate the merging, I believe it is probably best for all this to be merged through the drm-intel tree. But we'll see about that when the patch-set is ready. Regards, Hans