From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:42198 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750836AbdFCJO6 (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Jun 2017 05:14:58 -0400 Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2017 10:14:53 +0100 From: Jonathan Cameron To: Ryan Mallon Cc: Alexander Sverdlin , linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Hartley Sweeten , Hartmut Knaack , Lars-Peter Clausen , Peter Meerwald-Stadler , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/5] iio: ADC driver for EP93xx SoC Message-ID: <20170603101453.6b44b85a@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <5921F894.90809@gmail.com> References: <20170517171352.20369-1-alexander.sverdlin@gmail.com> <5921F894.90809@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-iio-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-iio@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 22 May 2017 06:29:08 +1000 Ryan Mallon wrote: > On 22/05/17 00:03, Jonathan Cameron wrote: > > On 17/05/17 18:13, Alexander Sverdlin wrote: > >> This series prepares the necessary infrastructure for ADC platform > >> device on > >> Cirrus Logic EP93xx family of SoCs and adds the driver for ADC device > >> using > >> IIO subsystem. > > Hartley, Ryan, > > > > How do you want to handle taking this series forward. > > Clearly we have a few arch specific bits and then the driver which > > is dependent on some of them. > > I no longer maintain an ep93xx tree because the architecture gets very > few patches now. Patches should go via the arm-soc tree, which is > maintained by (I believe) Arnd and Olaf. > > > > > I'm happy to take the lot through the IIO tree, but will be wanting > > a few acks. > > Sure, the series looks fine to me. For the ep93xx specific bits: > > Acked-by: Ryan Mallon > > > I'm interested to note how few implementations there are of clk_get_parent > > in tree. Any comments on that little bit of the code would be > > particularly welcome. > > The ep93xx architecture is old and obsolete. Because of this, and the > relatively few number of people developing for it and with hardware to > test, it hasn't gotten upgraded to some of the more modern kernel apis > like the common clock framework. > > It probably isn't too difficult to move ep93xx to the common clock > framework, but it is a separate change and I don't think Alexander > should have to do it as a prerequisite to getting this adc support merged. Agreed entirely! Alexander, would you mind reposting the whole series, with the linux-arm-kernel@lists.infrared.org cc'd. I've cc'd it to this email to provide a bit of background to the maintainers, but please add a note to the cover letter highlighting what Ryan has covered here. Thanks, Jonathan > > ~Ryan