Re: DTR gpio handling removed by 985bfd54c826c0ba873ca0adfd5589263e0c6ee2

[Felipe Balbi <balbi@ti.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2185 bytes --]

Hi,

On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 08:08:44AM +0200, Dr. H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> Hi Felipe,
> 
> Am 15.08.2014 um 00:58 schrieb Felipe Balbi <balbi@ti.com>:
> 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 11:04:58PM +0200, Belisko Marek wrote:
> >> during 3.15 release was removed by commit
> >> 985bfd54c826c0ba873ca0adfd5589263e0c6ee2 code which was added by
> >> 9574f36fb801035f6ab0fbb1b53ce2c12c17d100 by Neil Brown. We're using
> >> DTR gpio in gta04 device. I plan to post DT binding for DTR gpio +
> >> documentation and find out that Neil's code was removed by Felipe.
> >> Greg can you please revert mentioned commit? We're using DTR gpio in
> >> gta04 device. Or is there other way how to proceed? Thanks.
> > 
> > there are *NO* users of that in tree, if you're using it, then please
> > add a proper DTS for your device and figure out a way of passing DTR
> > gpio through DT.
> 
> In fact we are in the middle of preparing DT and driver patches for
> upstreaming the out of tree drivers Neil is mentioning. So there are
> no users *yet* and maybe we are the first one.

right, and that's why it was removed. How would we even know that the
code works when there are no users for it ?

> Neil has already completely argued and commented on that topic:
> 
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/4/23/736
> 
> Unfortunately he acked the removal with a completely non-technical
> argument:
> 
> > Just at the moment I'm finding it hard to care.
> > So
> >  Acked-by: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
> 
> Now we have the problem that it got kicked out while we were preparing
> the other parts :(
> 
> On the other hand, please consider that we don’t have the manpower and
> knowledge to modify bigger parts of Linux besides plumbing together
> parts that already exist and add drivers and DT nodes.
> 
> So please consider again to re-add
> 9574f36fb801035f6ab0fbb1b53ce2c12c17d100.
> 
> Or should we resubmit it together with our DT/drivers where we use it?

submit it together with your patches but it would be a lot better to see
that turned into something generic, which was commented on the same
thread IIRC.

cheers

-- 
balbi

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]