* query for hwmon: (mlxreg-fan) patch @ 2019-02-18 20:07 Vadim Pasternak 2019-02-18 20:20 ` Guenter Roeck 0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread From: Vadim Pasternak @ 2019-02-18 20:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux; +Cc: linux-hwmon Hi Guenter, I would like to ask you about the way of sending the patch for drivers/hwmon/mlxreg-fan.c. This patch makes use of new "capability" register, but required commit "platform_data/mlxreg: Add capability field to core platform data" from platform for-next branch: http://git.infradead.org/linux-platform-drivers-x86.git/blobdiff/9b28aa1d0eae1be1016c8f4ba504545caff01da3..946e4e02b11889cb161b15ff4712a8ba21a50eb6:/include/linux/platform_data/mlxreg.h Is it possibly to send a patch with such dependency? Or I should wait until "platform_data/mlxreg: Add capability field to core platform data" is got to upstream? Thanks, Vadim. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: query for hwmon: (mlxreg-fan) patch 2019-02-18 20:07 query for hwmon: (mlxreg-fan) patch Vadim Pasternak @ 2019-02-18 20:20 ` Guenter Roeck 2019-02-18 21:19 ` Vadim Pasternak 0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread From: Guenter Roeck @ 2019-02-18 20:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Vadim Pasternak; +Cc: linux-hwmon On 2/18/19 12:07 PM, Vadim Pasternak wrote: > Hi Guenter, > > I would like to ask you about the way of sending the patch for > drivers/hwmon/mlxreg-fan.c. > > This patch makes use of new "capability" register, but required commit > "platform_data/mlxreg: Add capability field to core platform data" > from platform for-next branch: > http://git.infradead.org/linux-platform-drivers-x86.git/blobdiff/9b28aa1d0eae1be1016c8f4ba504545caff01da3..946e4e02b11889cb161b15ff4712a8ba21a50eb6:/include/linux/platform_data/mlxreg.h > > Is it possibly to send a patch with such dependency? Or I should wait until > "platform_data/mlxreg: Add capability field to core platform data" is got > to upstream? > A single series submitted through one maintainer, with acks from all the other maintainers, is always the easiest. Otherwise one maintainer would have to create an immmutable branch with the essential patch(es) needed by all the others. Or, yes, you could wait for the infrastructure to be in place. Makes me wonder, though: If you are open to doing that, why the complex, confusing, and risky mlxreg_wdt_check_watchdog_type() in the watchdog driver (instead of providing a means for the driver to get the HW version directly from the parent) ? Guenter ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* RE: query for hwmon: (mlxreg-fan) patch 2019-02-18 20:20 ` Guenter Roeck @ 2019-02-18 21:19 ` Vadim Pasternak 0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread From: Vadim Pasternak @ 2019-02-18 21:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Guenter Roeck; +Cc: linux-hwmon, Michael Shych > -----Original Message----- > From: Guenter Roeck <groeck7@gmail.com> On Behalf Of Guenter Roeck > Sent: Monday, February 18, 2019 10:21 PM > To: Vadim Pasternak <vadimp@mellanox.com> > Cc: linux-hwmon@vger.kernel.org > Subject: Re: query for hwmon: (mlxreg-fan) patch > > On 2/18/19 12:07 PM, Vadim Pasternak wrote: > > Hi Guenter, > > > > I would like to ask you about the way of sending the patch for > > drivers/hwmon/mlxreg-fan.c. > > > > This patch makes use of new "capability" register, but required commit > > "platform_data/mlxreg: Add capability field to core platform data" > > from platform for-next branch: > > http://git.infradead.org/linux-platform-drivers-x86.git/blobdiff/9b28a > > > a1d0eae1be1016c8f4ba504545caff01da3..946e4e02b11889cb161b15ff4712a8b > a2 > > 1a50eb6:/include/linux/platform_data/mlxreg.h > > > > Is it possibly to send a patch with such dependency? Or I should wait > > until > > "platform_data/mlxreg: Add capability field to core platform data" is > > got to upstream? > > > > A single series submitted through one maintainer, with acks from all the other > maintainers, is always the easiest. Otherwise one maintainer would have to > create an immmutable branch with the essential patch(es) needed by all the > others. Or, yes, you could wait for the infrastructure to be in place. OK. I see. Will follow you input for the future patches. I used this field in mlx-platform and mlxre-hotplug drivers and also need it for mlxreg-fan and leds-mlxreg driver. And I thought that putting all in a single patchset will complicate submission. Will learn from this mistake. > > Makes me wonder, though: If you are open to doing that, why the complex, > confusing, and risky mlxreg_wdt_check_watchdog_type() in the watchdog driver > (instead of providing a means for the driver to get the HW version directly from > the parent) ? Well. All this info really should be available in mlx-platform, which is a parent. It has to provide configuration like: static struct mlxreg_core_data mlxplat_mlxcpld_wd_main_regs_type2[] = { { .label = "action", .reg = MLXPLAT_CPLD_LPC_REG_WD2_ACT_OFFSET, .mask = MLXPLAT_CPLD_WD_RESET_ACT_MASK, .bit = 0, }, { .label = "ping", .reg = MLXPLAT_CPLD_LPC_REG_WD2_ACT_OFFSET, .mask = MLXPLAT_CPLD_WD_RESET_ACT_MASK, .bit = 0, }, ... }; It however will require to add some special field to "struct mlxreg_core_data" for passing it to mlx_wdt. We'll think about it. Thanks for this input. > > Guenter Thank you very much, Vadim. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2019-02-18 21:19 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2019-02-18 20:07 query for hwmon: (mlxreg-fan) patch Vadim Pasternak 2019-02-18 20:20 ` Guenter Roeck 2019-02-18 21:19 ` Vadim Pasternak
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).