From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mailrelay005.isp.belgacom.be (mailrelay005.isp.belgacom.be [195.238.6.171]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A361DE128 for ; Wed, 23 Apr 2008 22:12:43 +1000 (EST) From: Laurent Pinchart To: Jean Delvare Subject: Re: [PATCH] rtc-pcf8563: Add device ids table Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2008 14:12:37 +0200 References: <200804171708.32847.laurentp@cse-semaphore.com> <200804221612.06745.laurentp@cse-semaphore.com> <20080423131657.71d6312f@hyperion.delvare> In-Reply-To: <20080423131657.71d6312f@hyperion.delvare> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart2593632.KDYGHpOAHl"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Message-Id: <200804231412.40038.laurentp@cse-semaphore.com> Cc: linuxppc-dev list , Alessandro Zummo , rtc-linux@googlegroups.com, i2c@lm-sensors.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , --nextPart2593632.KDYGHpOAHl Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Hi Jean, On Wednesday 23 April 2008 13:16, Jean Delvare wrote: > Hi Laurent, >=20 > On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 16:11:56 +0200, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > Hi Jean, > >=20 > > On Saturday 19 April 2008 18:43, Jochen Friedrich wrote: > > > Jean Delvare wrote: > > > > I'm not sure. I didn't have the time to look at it myself, but I am > > > > under the impression that the powerpc folks are tired of having to > > > > wait for me and may push it to Linus through their tree? That would= be > > > > fine with me, as I don't want to be the one delaying something many > > > > developers want (but I also can't sign patches I've not even read.) >=20 > I still don't know exactly what happened there... I think I saw some > "OpenFirmware i2c" patches go upstream yesterday? But not the ones > listed below, which I thought they depended upon. The code that went upstream introduces helper functions to create i2c devic= es=20 from information supplied by the OF device tree. It doesn't strictly depend= =20 on the below patches, but the new devices won't be properly bound to a driv= er=20 without them. > > > The required patches are: > > >=20 > > > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/linuxppc/patch?id=3D17833 > > > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/linuxppc/patch?id=3D17834 > > >=20 > > > which are just the forward ported patches you sent to the poweprc > > > mailing list some time ago:=20 > > >=20 > > > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/linuxppc/patch?id=3D16282 > > > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/linuxppc/patch?id=3D16283 > >=20 > > Given that the required patches are just forward-ported versions of > > patches you sent (and thus probably reviewed as well :-)), what's the b= est > > way to get them in 2.6.26 (if at all possible) ? >=20 > It's not that easy. A lot of new new-style i2c drivers have shown up in > the kernel since I wrote my patches (themselves derived heavily from > Jon Smirl's). Even if Jochen's patches are based on mine, we still need > to take a careful look on how each driver is modified, I remember for > example that some v4l drivers were using the original new-style driver > binding in a way I did not expect. So I can't just sign these patches > and hope they didn't break anything. It needs care, and this requires > time. I won't ask to merge the patches for 2.6.26-rc1 and fix introduced breakage= s=20 afterwards, I know how you would react to that :-) > I will do my best to get this done before the 2.6.26 merge window > closes, but I can't promise anything. Nobody will get angry if you can't merge them in time for 2.6.26. But many= =20 people will be happy if you can :-) Cheers, =2D-=20 Laurent Pinchart CSE Semaphore Belgium Chaussee de Bruxelles, 732A B-1410 Waterloo Belgium T +32 (2) 387 42 59 =46 +32 (2) 387 42 75 --nextPart2593632.KDYGHpOAHl Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBIDye38y9gWxC9vpcRAlIPAJ9pXKWfBM9nF4YR6zKsRA1t4Fj+jgCeIwAk aiuDqQ8QL4qRvWodWQNZnbU= =cxKb -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart2593632.KDYGHpOAHl--