From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lee Jones Subject: Re: [RFC 7/8] Start migrating XUSB away from MFD Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2015 13:27:37 +0000 Message-ID: <20151102132737.GX4058@x1> References: <1446465323-9493-1-git-send-email-martyn.welch@collabora.co.uk> <1446465323-9493-8-git-send-email-martyn.welch@collabora.co.uk> <20151102124732.GW4058@x1> <56376389.8030806@collabora.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <56376389.8030806@collabora.co.uk> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Martyn Welch Cc: linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org, thierry.reding@gmail.com, swarren@wwwdotorg.org, jonathanh@nvidia.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, abrestic@chromium.org List-Id: linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 02 Nov 2015, Martyn Welch wrote: > On 02/11/15 12:47, Lee Jones wrote: > >On Mon, 02 Nov 2015, Martyn Welch wrote: > > > >>From: Martyn Welch > >> > >>This is my initial attempt to get xusb working without being a MFD = on the > >>latest upstream kernel. It's still a bit hacky in places, but does = seem to > >>get the USB2 up and working (USB3 device is recognised as a USB3 de= vice > >>rather than enumberating as a USB2 device). > >After my 20 second look at the 2 patches of this set you sent me, I'= ve > >concluded that it looks barking mad. In patch 2 you're adding the > >XUSB MFD driver, then in this patch you're telling us that you're > >moving away from MFD despite adding more code to the subsystem. >=20 > Hi Lee, >=20 > Sorry, seems git send-email added you of it's own volition. >=20 > I've sent these patches to the mailing list for comment/help not for > submission. As mentioned in the cover email, the first 5 patches are > from an existing series that has been rejected. The later 3 patches > show my modifications. I have not yet moved these files from the MFD > directory, but will before submission (the series will be reworked > so that the driver never goes into the MFD area). Okay, very well. > >Besides, I'm never applying a patch that self confesses to be "hacky > >in places" into Mainline, ever. >=20 > As I mentioned before, I'm posting these patches for comment (hence > why I've marked them as "RFC" not "PATCH"). I did notice that this was an RFC -- and this was my Comment. ;) --=20 Lee Jones Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead Linaro.org =E2=94=82 Open source software for ARM SoCs =46ollow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog