Re: [PATCH v7 0/5] mfd: tps65218: Clean ups

Re: [PATCH v7 0/5] mfd: tps65218: Clean ups

[Keerthy]

On Wednesday 10 August 2016 06:24 PM, Keerthy wrote:
> The series cleans up mainly the regulator driver and implements
> the device tree parsing using the regulator framework. Removes
> all the redundant compatibles for the individual regulators.
> Adds platform_device_id table for the gpio and power button modules.
>
> One of the patch removes redundant read wrapper and makes
> use of regmap_read wherever necessary.

Mark,

Should i repost this series? I do not see this series in linux-next yet.

Regards,
Keerthy
>
> The series is checked for all the regulator registrations on
> am437x-gp-evm.
>
> Boot log: http://pastebin.ubuntu.com/22905402/
>
> The series is based on linux-next on top of series titled:
> [PATCH v3 0/2] regulator: Enable suspend configuration
>
> Do not have the link of the above series available at the moment.
>
> Changes in v7:
>
> Rebasing to latest next branch. GPIO patch of this series
> pushed to linux-next by Linus. Hence posting the remaining
> patches with respective Acks from the domain Maintainers.
>
> Changes in v6:
>
> Rebased regulator/mfd clean up patches against linux-next +
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/6/24/122 series.
>
> Changes in v5:
>
> Rebased regulator clean up patch against linux-next.
>
> Changes in v4:
>
> For gpio-tps65218 reatined the compatible table.
> Fixed missing ';' in the power button patch.
> Fixed comments on the Documentation patch.
> Split the Device Tree patches to a separate series.
>
> Changes in v3:
>
> Missed making corresponding changes in the power button and gpio
> drivers. Added couple of patches to fix them to use mfd_cell way
> of parsing.
>
> Keerthy (5):
>   mfd: tps65218: Remove redundant read wrapper
>   Documentation: regulator: tps65218: Update examples
>   input: tps65218-pwrbutton: Add platform_device_id table
>   mfd: tps65218: Use mfd_add_devices instead of of_platform_populate
>   regulator: tps65218: Remove all the compatibles
>
>  .../devicetree/bindings/regulator/tps65218.txt     |  87 +++++++++---
>  drivers/gpio/gpio-tps65218.c                       |   3 +-
>  drivers/input/misc/tps65218-pwrbutton.c            |  10 +-
>  drivers/mfd/tps65218.c                             |  34 ++---
>  drivers/regulator/tps65218-regulator.c             | 153 ++++++++-------------
>  include/linux/mfd/tps65218.h                       |   3 +-
>  6 files changed, 158 insertions(+), 132 deletions(-)
>

Re: [PATCH v7 0/5] mfd: tps65218: Clean ups

[Mark Brown]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 852 bytes --]

On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 05:12:38PM +0530, Keerthy wrote:

> Should i repost this series? I do not see this series in linux-next yet.

Please don't send content free pings and please allow a reasonable time
for review.  People get busy, go on holiday, attend conferences and so 
on so unless there is some reason for urgency (like critical bug fixes)
please allow at least a couple of weeks for review.  If there have been
review comments then people may be waiting for those to be addressed.

Sending content free pings adds to the mail volume (if they are seen at
all) which is often the problem and since they can't be reviewed
directly if something has gone wrong you'll have to resend the patches
anyway, though there are some other maintainers who like them - if in
doubt look at how patches for the subsystem are normally handled.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 473 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH v7 0/5] mfd: tps65218: Clean ups

[Keerthy]

On Friday 16 September 2016 07:01 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 05:12:38PM +0530, Keerthy wrote:
>
>> Should i repost this series? I do not see this series in linux-next yet.
>
> Please don't send content free pings and please allow a reasonable time
> for review.  People get busy, go on holiday, attend conferences and so
> on so unless there is some reason for urgency (like critical bug fixes)
> please allow at least a couple of weeks for review.  If there have been
> review comments then people may be waiting for those to be addressed.

I should have been clearer.
The last Lee Jones conveyed that:

"I can't take this series yet, since it relies on a change which was
taken into Mark's Regulator tree"

https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/31/312

So wanted to check if i needed to re-base/repost this series again.
Sorry about the confusion i think that is because of $Subject goof up in 
the 0th patch of the series.

>
> Sending content free pings adds to the mail volume (if they are seen at
> all) which is often the problem and since they can't be reviewed
> directly if something has gone wrong you'll have to resend the patches
> anyway, though there are some other maintainers who like them - if in
> doubt look at how patches for the subsystem are normally handled.
>

Re: [PATCH v7 0/5] mfd: tps65218: Clean ups

[Mark Brown]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1077 bytes --]

On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 09:51:38PM +0530, Keerthy wrote:
> On Friday 16 September 2016 07:01 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 05:12:38PM +0530, Keerthy wrote:

> > > Should i repost this series? I do not see this series in linux-next yet.

> > Please don't send content free pings and please allow a reasonable time
> > for review.  People get busy, go on holiday, attend conferences and so

> I should have been clearer.
> The last Lee Jones conveyed that:

> "I can't take this series yet, since it relies on a change which was
> taken into Mark's Regulator tree"

> https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/31/312

> So wanted to check if i needed to re-base/repost this series again.
> Sorry about the confusion i think that is because of $Subject goof up in the
> 0th patch of the series.

I'm afraid I've no real idea what this series is about or what patches
it might depend on, sorry.  If you're waiting for me to do something
you'll need to tell me what it is but if it's a dependency that needs
cross merging then reposting this series isn't going to be needed.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 473 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH v7 0/5] mfd: tps65218: Clean ups

[Keerthy]

On Friday 16 September 2016 11:06 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 09:51:38PM +0530, Keerthy wrote:
>> On Friday 16 September 2016 07:01 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
>>> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 05:12:38PM +0530, Keerthy wrote:
>
>>>> Should i repost this series? I do not see this series in linux-next yet.
>
>>> Please don't send content free pings and please allow a reasonable time
>>> for review.  People get busy, go on holiday, attend conferences and so
>
>> I should have been clearer.
>> The last Lee Jones conveyed that:
>
>> "I can't take this series yet, since it relies on a change which was
>> taken into Mark's Regulator tree"
>
>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/8/31/312
>
>> So wanted to check if i needed to re-base/repost this series again.
>> Sorry about the confusion i think that is because of $Subject goof up in the
>> 0th patch of the series.
>
> I'm afraid I've no real idea what this series is about or what patches
> it might depend on, sorry.  If you're waiting for me to do something
> you'll need to tell me what it is but if it's a dependency that needs
> cross merging then reposting this series isn't going to be needed.

The series cleans up mainly the regulator driver and implements
the device tree parsing using the regulator framework. Removes
all the redundant compatibles for the individual regulators.
Adds platform_device_id table for the gpio and power button modules.

This has been reviewed extensively.

Looks like v7 no longer applies directly on the linux-next branch as it 
conflicts with:

https://kernel.googlesource.com/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/dtor/input/+/722dc54628ca5cffd3b4581b523775aa422b55df

I will rebase and repost on the current linux-next and post v8.

>