Re: [PATCH 2/2] gpio/omap: add *remove* callback in platform_driver

Shilimkar, Santosh
2012-07-17T06:03:04Z

On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 10:40 PM, Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com> wrote:
>
> Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> writes:
>
> > On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 7:48 PM, Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com> wrote:
> >
> >> In the case of OMAP GPIO, unless it's an obvious fix, I would recommend
> >> you wait at least until you see some acks/tested tags from any of
> >>
> >> - Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com>
> >> - Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@ti.com>
> >> - Benoit Cousson <b-cousson@ti.com>
> >>
> >> or Tony, Paul or myself.
> >
> > Instead of trying to store this information in my and Grants brains and
> > us forgetting it, what about patching MAINTAINERS to reflect the fact
> > instead? That's better I think, plus I use that file a lot.
> >
> >> For major series, I have been collecting/queueing them for Grant after
> >> ensuring they have been well reviewed and well tested (although I am
> >> eagerly hoping to hand off this role to someone else.)
> >
> > Listing it under your GIT tree in MAINTAINERS for this driver will make
> > this work better I think.
> >
> > One path for OMAP GPIO patches, simple. It's obviously the
> > ambiguity that cause the trouble. Then you can also decide
> > on each cycle whether to send these to GPIO or ARM SoC
> > etc.
>
> Yeah, I understand the process, but I've been avoiding doing that
> because, well, I don't want the job. I have been trying to get someone
> else at TI to maintain this driver, but have not been successful.
>
> So, until that happens, feel free to queue up the patch below.
>
> Santosh, note that I've put you as co-maintainer of this driver.
>
No problem Kevin.

Regards
Santosh