Re: I3C Mastership RFC

[Przemyslaw Gaj <pgaj@cadence.com>]

Hi,

+Rafal

The 11/14/2019 13:32, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> 
> Hi Vitor,
> 
> On Thu, 14 Nov 2019 11:56:00 +0000
> Vitor Soares <Vitor.Soares@synopsys.com> wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > From: Przemyslaw Gaj <pgaj@cadence.com>
> > Date: Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 06:10:12
> > 
> > > Hi Vitor,
> > > 
> > > The 11/12/2019 08:41, Boris Brezillon wrote:  
> > > > 
> > > > Hi Vitor,
> > > > 
> > > > On Mon, 11 Nov 2019 12:30:45 +0000
> > > > Vitor Soares <Vitor.Soares@synopsys.com> wrote:
> > > >   
> > > > > Hi Boris and Przemek,
> > > > > 
> > > > > I have a working version for tests purposes. Yet, I have some basic TODOS 
> > > > > to address during the takeover of the bus.  
> > > > 
> > > > Okay. Would you mind sharing a branch with this material so Przemek and
> > > > I can have a look at it?  
> > > 
> > > So, Vitor, can you share your changes? Can you tell me what you had to
> > > change to make it work? Also, which patch version is this based on?  
> > 
> > I'm closing a task and after that I will prepare the RFC.
> 
> Okay, can we have an estimate? Are we talking about days or weeks?
> 
> > 
> > I based in all version and tried to pass everything to master.c file.
> 
> I'm not sure what that means, but okay.
> 
> > Right now my challenge it to trigger mastership request when a device 
> > driver want to access to the bus but I believe we can discuss that after.
> 
> That's kind of a basic feature when talking about mastership handover,
> but sure, we can discuss it after your RFC has been posted.
> 
> Note that I'm not super happy to have to go back to square 1 and throw
> away all of the work done by Przemek, especially since Przemek was the
> first one to post a patchset and he never really said he didn't
> want or didn't have time to continue working on this task (not even
> mentioning the time I spent reviewing those patches...).
> 
> If Przemek is fine with this situation I'm okay making an exception,
> but be aware that it's not how we usually do: the person that posts a
> patchset first leads the thing (of course, it's even better if there's
> some kind of coordination before the patch is posted).

It depends when you are able to post it. If it's this or next week,
I'm ok. But otherwise, I have to start working on that now. I'm trying
to address your comments from my latest patch, having in mind HCI
implementation. As I said before, our customer is pushing. They have
boards with our hardware and they started using that. Please let me
know.

> 
> BTW, you mentioned working on a lot of different topics, but most of
> them were left unfinished (userspace i3cdev interface, I3C slave
> framework/API, ...). Any plans to post RFCs on those aspects anytime
> soon? I mean, there's plenty of topics to work on, and I'd really prefer
> that each developer work on a different topic instead of duplicating the
> effort...
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Boris

-- 
-- 
Przemyslaw Gaj

_______________________________________________
linux-i3c mailing list
linux-i3c@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-i3c