On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 01:03:34PM +0100, Jon Hunter wrote: > The Display Port Auxiliary (DPAUX) channel pads can be shared with an > internal I2C controller. Add pinctrl support for these pads so that the > I2C controller can request and use these pads. > > Jon Hunter (13): > drm/tegra: Clean-up if probing DPAUX fails > drm/tegra: Add helper functions for setting up DPAUX pads > dt-bindings: drm/tegra: Update DPAUX documentation > drm/tegra: Add sor-safe clock for DPAUX on Tegra210 > drm/tegra: Prepare DPAUX for supporting generic PM domains > pinctrl: pinconf: Add generic helper function for freeing mappings > dt-bindings: i2c: Add support for 'i2c-bus' subnode > i2c: core: Add support for 'i2c-bus' subnode > dt-bindings: drm/tegra: Add DPAUX pinctrl documentation > drm/tegra: Add pinctrl support for DPAUX > arm64: tegra: Add SOR power-domain node > arm64: tegra: Add sor-safe clock to DPAUX binding > arm64: tegra: Add DPAUX pinctrl bindings There aren't really any hard dependencies between all these patches, right? I think the worst case would be if the arm64 DTS changes get merged before the I2C core changes (i2c-bus node support), then the I2C core will complain about the pinmux nodes, but that wouldn't be fatal, or have any bad side-effects, right? If so, I think it would be fine if the I2C changes went through the I2C tree. It might be nicer to have the I2C changes in a separate branch that could be pulled into the Tegra tree so that we can get everything ready there and avoid the warnings. Wolfram, if you agree I can apply the I2C patches (binding + core) to a stable branch and send out a pull request? That is, once Jon's addressed any comments and you are onboard with the change. Thierry
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
