From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from services.gcu-squad.org (zone0.gcu-squad.org [212.85.147.21]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E57CFDDE05 for ; Sun, 27 Apr 2008 22:19:18 +1000 (EST) Date: Sun, 27 Apr 2008 14:18:56 +0200 From: Jean Delvare To: Jochen Friedrich Subject: Re: [PATCH] rtc-pcf8563: Add device ids table Message-ID: <20080427141856.7725e877@hyperion.delvare> In-Reply-To: <480F390A.90707@scram.de> References: <200804171708.32847.laurentp@cse-semaphore.com> <200804221612.06745.laurentp@cse-semaphore.com> <20080423131657.71d6312f@hyperion.delvare> <200804231412.40038.laurentp@cse-semaphore.com> <20080423144756.3fc9b1bf@hyperion.delvare> <480F390A.90707@scram.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Alessandro Zummo , rtc-linux@googlegroups.com, linuxppc-dev list , i2c@lm-sensors.org, Andrew Morton List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 15:26:34 +0200, Jochen Friedrich wrote: > Hi Jean, > > > Jochen, I'm a bit confused by the dependencies that exist - or not - > > between these 7 patches you sent at once. I thought they had to be > > applied in sequence but it seems not? And some of them should > > apparently go through me i2c tree but others (e.g. [7/7]) not? > > [1/7] and [2/7] are forward ports of patches from you. I'm currently > just running a make allmodconfig compile to check if it really caught > all affected i2c drivers. > > These are the patches we are talking about. > > [3/7] is the OF helper stuff which translates between OF names and > i2c types. It does NOT translate OF names to module names, but relies > on [1/7] to do so. Without [1/7], [3/7] still applies, but module > auto loading won't work. > > This has been applied to 2.6.26. > > > I would appreciate if you could summarize quickly which patches depend > > on others in which way. If we can make smaller subsets of patches, that > > will be easier for me to review and push upstream on my limited time. > > [4/7] is the patch from Jon Smirl to convert i2c-mpc to OF. This relies > on [3/7] instead of Jons initial OF-autoloading patches you didn't like. > As there were no comments at all, I would however postpone this to 2.6.27. > > [5/7] is the cleanup patch (originating from you) which completely removes > old driver matching scheme. This should probably wait until 2.6.27, as well. > This relies on [1/7] and [2/7]. > > [6/7] and [7/7] are a new driver and depend on [3/7]. This can wait for 2.6.27, > as well (i would rather like to see those in -mm to get more testing, though). Thanks for the summary. Right now I'm working on [1/7] and [2/7] to get something ready to go upstream in the next few days. Probably only a part of [2/7] can go there quickly, non-trivial cases (e.g. ivtv) will have to wait until rc2 or later. I also agree with you that [5/7] should be delayed for now, we need to make sure that no driver is left using the old device/driver matching scheme, and that can't possibly be done before rc2 at best. I will post the 2 updated patches for review and testing as soon as I am done. -- Jean Delvare