Request for i2c re-inclusion in linux-next

Request for i2c re-inclusion in linux-next

[Andi Shyti]

Hi Stephen,

could you please include in the linux-next i2c related branches
from my repository:

https://kernel.googlesource.com/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/andi.shyti/linux.git

the following branches:

for next:       i2c/for-next
fixes:          i2c/for-current

I have requested this branch to be the main repository for
collecting i2c host patches[*].

Thank you,
Andi

[*] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240124225031.3152667-1-andi.shyti@kernel.org/

Re: Request for i2c re-inclusion in linux-next

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1022 bytes --]

Hi Andi,

On Thu, 25 Jan 2024 21:28:09 +0100 Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@kernel.org> wrote:
> 
> could you please include in the linux-next i2c related branches
> from my repository:
> 
> https://kernel.googlesource.com/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/andi.shyti/linux.git
> 
> the following branches:
> 
> for next:       i2c/for-next
> fixes:          i2c/for-current
> 
> I have requested this branch to be the main repository for
> collecting i2c host patches[*].
> 
> Thank you,
> Andi
> 
> [*] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240124225031.3152667-1-andi.shyti@kernel.org/

OK, I currently have an i2c tree from Wolfram who is listed as the
maintainer, so I need to hear from him (and do you meant to replace his
tree, or add another one?).  Also, above you list a git tree from
kernel.googlesource.com, but in the patch above, you use
git.kernel.org.  The latter is preferred.  And currently, they do *not*
have the same i2c/for-next and i2c/for-current head commits.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: Request for i2c re-inclusion in linux-next

[Andi Shyti]

Hi Stephen,

> > could you please include in the linux-next i2c related branches
> > from my repository:
> > 
> > https://kernel.googlesource.com/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/andi.shyti/linux.git
> > 
> > the following branches:
> > 
> > for next:       i2c/for-next
> > fixes:          i2c/for-current
> > 
> > I have requested this branch to be the main repository for
> > collecting i2c host patches[*].
> > 
> > Thank you,
> > Andi
> > 
> > [*] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240124225031.3152667-1-andi.shyti@kernel.org/
> 
> OK, I currently have an i2c tree from Wolfram who is listed as the
> maintainer, so I need to hear from him (and do you meant to replace his
> tree, or add another one?). 

Yes, I'm going to replace Wolfram's tree. We've been agreeing
together on this change.

> Also, above you list a git tree from
> kernel.googlesource.com, but in the patch above, you use
> git.kernel.org.  The latter is preferred.  And currently, they do *not*
> have the same i2c/for-next and i2c/for-current head commits.

Oh! You are right! I have done a lazy replacement
/wsa/andi\.shyti/. Will update with the correct git.kernel.org
repository.

Thanks,
Andi

Re: Request for i2c re-inclusion in linux-next

[Conor Dooley]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1173 bytes --]

On Fri, Jan 26, 2024 at 07:53:58AM +0100, Andi Shyti wrote:
> Hi Stephen,
> 
> > > could you please include in the linux-next i2c related branches
> > > from my repository:
> > > 
> > > https://kernel.googlesource.com/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/andi.shyti/linux.git
> > > 
> > > the following branches:
> > > 
> > > for next:       i2c/for-next
> > > fixes:          i2c/for-current
> > > 
> > > I have requested this branch to be the main repository for
> > > collecting i2c host patches[*].
> > > 
> > > Thank you,
> > > Andi
> > > 
> > > [*] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240124225031.3152667-1-andi.shyti@kernel.org/
> > 
> > OK, I currently have an i2c tree from Wolfram who is listed as the
> > maintainer, so I need to hear from him (and do you meant to replace his
> > tree, or add another one?). 
> 
> Yes, I'm going to replace Wolfram's tree. We've been agreeing
> together on this change.

Passing meddler, this tree is just for host controllers and separate
from the i2c subsystem tree, right?

There seems to only be one tree in Next/Trees for the whole subsystem,
rather than one for the subsystem and one for host controllers.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]

Re: Request for i2c re-inclusion in linux-next

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 26/01/2024 07:53, Andi Shyti wrote:
> Hi Stephen,
> 
>>> could you please include in the linux-next i2c related branches
>>> from my repository:
>>>
>>> https://kernel.googlesource.com/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/andi.shyti/linux.git
>>>
>>> the following branches:
>>>
>>> for next:       i2c/for-next
>>> fixes:          i2c/for-current
>>>
>>> I have requested this branch to be the main repository for
>>> collecting i2c host patches[*].
>>>
>>> Thank you,
>>> Andi
>>>
>>> [*] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240124225031.3152667-1-andi.shyti@kernel.org/
>>
>> OK, I currently have an i2c tree from Wolfram who is listed as the
>> maintainer, so I need to hear from him (and do you meant to replace his
>> tree, or add another one?). 
> 
> Yes, I'm going to replace Wolfram's tree. We've been agreeing
> together on this change.

I don't think Wolfram's tree should be dropped. He is your upstream
maintainer:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/ZbNzTKCFxBx9Bz6Y@ninjato/

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Re: Request for i2c re-inclusion in linux-next

[Andi Shyti]

Hi,

> >>> could you please include in the linux-next i2c related branches
> >>> from my repository:
> >>>
> >>> https://kernel.googlesource.com/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/andi.shyti/linux.git
> >>>
> >>> the following branches:
> >>>
> >>> for next:       i2c/for-next
> >>> fixes:          i2c/for-current
> >>>
> >>> I have requested this branch to be the main repository for
> >>> collecting i2c host patches[*].
> >>>
> >>> Thank you,
> >>> Andi
> >>>
> >>> [*] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240124225031.3152667-1-andi.shyti@kernel.org/
> >>
> >> OK, I currently have an i2c tree from Wolfram who is listed as the
> >> maintainer, so I need to hear from him (and do you meant to replace his
> >> tree, or add another one?). 
> > 
> > Yes, I'm going to replace Wolfram's tree. We've been agreeing
> > together on this change.
> 
> I don't think Wolfram's tree should be dropped. He is your upstream
> maintainer:
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/ZbNzTKCFxBx9Bz6Y@ninjato/

yes, Wolfram has replied already, so, yes, this will collect
patches only for the hosts (busses/ and algos/).

Thanks,
Andi

Re: Request for i2c re-inclusion in linux-next

[Andi Shyti]

On Fri, Jan 26, 2024 at 07:54:04AM +0100, Andi Shyti wrote:
> Hi Stephen,
> 
> > > could you please include in the linux-next i2c related branches
> > > from my repository:
> > > 
> > > https://kernel.googlesource.com/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/andi.shyti/linux.git
> > > 
> > > the following branches:
> > > 
> > > for next:       i2c/for-next
> > > fixes:          i2c/for-current
> > > 
> > > I have requested this branch to be the main repository for
> > > collecting i2c host patches[*].
> > > 
> > > Thank you,
> > > Andi
> > > 
> > > [*] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240124225031.3152667-1-andi.shyti@kernel.org/
> > 
> > OK, I currently have an i2c tree from Wolfram who is listed as the
> > maintainer, so I need to hear from him (and do you meant to replace his
> > tree, or add another one?). 
> 
> Yes, I'm going to replace Wolfram's tree. We've been agreeing
> together on this change.

Sorry, replace only for the subsystem in the linked patch, as
Wolfram has confirmed.

> > Also, above you list a git tree from
> > kernel.googlesource.com, but in the patch above, you use
> > git.kernel.org.  The latter is preferred.  And currently, they do *not*
> > have the same i2c/for-next and i2c/for-current head commits.
> 
> Oh! You are right! I have done a lazy replacement
> /wsa/andi\.shyti/. Will update with the correct git.kernel.org
> repository.

Actually, the patch was right, but my mail was wrong, I did a
copy paste of my previous mail to you. The repository is this
one:

git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/andi.shyti/linux.git

or its https version:

https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/andi.shyti/linux.git

whichever you prefer. There you will see the two branches. I am
trying to copy Wolfram's way of doing things.

sorry for the confusion.

Andi

Re: Request for i2c re-inclusion in linux-next

[Wolfram Sang]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 300 bytes --]


> whichever you prefer. There you will see the two branches. I am
> trying to copy Wolfram's way of doing things.

If you copy my style, then only for-next goes to linux-next.

I have branches for-mergewindow and for-current which I let Linus pull.
I merge both branches into for-next for Stephen.


[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: Request for i2c re-inclusion in linux-next

[Andi Shyti]

Hi Wolfram,

> > whichever you prefer. There you will see the two branches. I am
> > trying to copy Wolfram's way of doing things.
> 
> If you copy my style, then only for-next goes to linux-next.
> 
> I have branches for-mergewindow and for-current which I let Linus pull.
> I merge both branches into for-next for Stephen.

OK... makes sense I can do it this way, as well.

Then let's just have for-next to be integrated in Stephen's
branch, then.

Thanks,
Andi

Re: Request for i2c re-inclusion in linux-next

[Mark Brown]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 794 bytes --]

On Fri, Jan 26, 2024 at 02:33:18PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote:

> > whichever you prefer. There you will see the two branches. I am
> > trying to copy Wolfram's way of doing things.

> If you copy my style, then only for-next goes to linux-next.

> I have branches for-mergewindow and for-current which I let Linus pull.
> I merge both branches into for-next for Stephen.

It might be worth having -next pull in the fixes branch separately (even
if you also merge it into your for-next) - as well as the main tree
-next also publishes a pending-fixes branch carrying only the things
targeted as fixes.  Some of the CI systems test that independently, the
goal is to catch issues with fixes having unexpected dependencies on
other things in -next (we had a few incidents with that at one point).

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: Request for i2c re-inclusion in linux-next

[Wolfram Sang]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 388 bytes --]

Hi Stephen,

> OK, I currently have an i2c tree from Wolfram who is listed as the
> maintainer, so I need to hear from him (and do you meant to replace his
> tree, or add another one?).  Also, above you list a git tree from

This is about adding another one. I will keep maintaining the I2C core,
while Andi is picking up patches for the host controller drivers.

Thank you!

   Wolfram


[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: Request for i2c re-inclusion in linux-next

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1589 bytes --]

Hi Andi,

On Thu, 25 Jan 2024 21:28:09 +0100 Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> could you please include in the linux-next i2c related branches
> from my repository:
> 
> https://kernel.googlesource.com/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/andi.shyti/linux.git
> 
> the following branches:
> 
> for next:       i2c/for-next
> fixes:          i2c/for-current
> 
> I have requested this branch to be the main repository for
> collecting i2c host patches[*].

I have added the 2 i2c-host trees using

git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/andi.shyti/linux.git

i2c/for-current branch is known as i2c-host-fixes
i2c/for-next branch is know as i2c-host

both are useful as Mark Brown pointed out.

Thanks for adding your subsystem tree as a participant of linux-next.  As
you may know, this is not a judgement of your code.  The purpose of
linux-next is for integration testing and to lower the impact of
conflicts between subsystems in the next merge window. 

You will need to ensure that the patches/commits in your tree/series have
been:
     * submitted under GPL v2 (or later) and include the Contributor's
        Signed-off-by,
     * posted to the relevant mailing list,
     * reviewed by you (or another maintainer of your subsystem tree),
     * successfully unit tested, and 
     * destined for the current or next Linux merge window.

Basically, this should be just what you would send to Linus (or ask him
to fetch).  It is allowed to be rebased if you deem it necessary.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell 
sfr@canb.auug.org.au

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: Request for i2c re-inclusion in linux-next

[Andi Shyti]

Hi Stephen,

On Sun, Jan 28, 2024 at 02:28:04PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Jan 2024 21:28:09 +0100 Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@kernel.org> wrote:
> > could you please include in the linux-next i2c related branches
> > from my repository:
> > 
> > https://kernel.googlesource.com/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/andi.shyti/linux.git
> > 
> > the following branches:
> > 
> > for next:       i2c/for-next
> > fixes:          i2c/for-current
> > 
> > I have requested this branch to be the main repository for
> > collecting i2c host patches[*].
> 
> I have added the 2 i2c-host trees using
> 
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/andi.shyti/linux.git
> 
> i2c/for-current branch is known as i2c-host-fixes
> i2c/for-next branch is know as i2c-host

Thanks! I have renamed them in my repo as i2c-host and
i2c-host-fixes to be aligned with your naming. I'll keep both
naming for a while until you decide to update.

> both are useful as Mark Brown pointed out.

Thanks, Mark!

> Thanks for adding your subsystem tree as a participant of linux-next.  As
> you may know, this is not a judgement of your code.  The purpose of
> linux-next is for integration testing and to lower the impact of
> conflicts between subsystems in the next merge window. 
> 
> You will need to ensure that the patches/commits in your tree/series have
> been:
>      * submitted under GPL v2 (or later) and include the Contributor's
>         Signed-off-by,
>      * posted to the relevant mailing list,
>      * reviewed by you (or another maintainer of your subsystem tree),
>      * successfully unit tested, and 
>      * destined for the current or next Linux merge window.
> 
> Basically, this should be just what you would send to Linus (or ask him
> to fetch).  It is allowed to be rebased if you deem it necessary.

Thanks, Stephen!

Andi

Re: Request for i2c re-inclusion in linux-next

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 484 bytes --]

Hi Andi,

On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 13:35:35 +0100 Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> Thanks! I have renamed them in my repo as i2c-host and
> i2c-host-fixes to be aligned with your naming. I'll keep both
> naming for a while until you decide to update.

I had no problem with the original branch names, I just fetch those
branches into the appropriate remotes in my tree.  The names I use are
just how I refer to them in emails etc.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: Request for i2c re-inclusion in linux-next

[Stephen Rothwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 326 bytes --]

Hi Andi,

On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 13:35:35 +0100 Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> Thanks! I have renamed them in my repo as i2c-host and
> i2c-host-fixes to be aligned with your naming. I'll keep both
> naming for a while until you decide to update.

I have updated my end.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: Request for i2c re-inclusion in linux-next

[Andi Shyti]

Hi Stephen,

On Thu, Feb 01, 2024 at 07:56:05AM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
> Hi Andi,
> 
> On Tue, 30 Jan 2024 13:35:35 +0100 Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks! I have renamed them in my repo as i2c-host and
> > i2c-host-fixes to be aligned with your naming. I'll keep both
> > naming for a while until you decide to update.
> 
> I have updated my end.

Thanks!

Andi