On 8 June 2015 at 10:58, Vivek Gautam <gautam.vivek@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi, > > > > On Monday, June 08, 2015 10:44 AM, "Krzysztof Kozlowski" > <k.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > my apologies for being late in replying to this thread. > >> 2015-06-08 13:21 GMT+09:00 Anand Moon <linux.amoon@xxxxxxxxx>: >>> >>> Hi Krzysztof , >>> >>> On 8 June 2015 at 07:40, Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 07.06.2015 22:20, Anand Moon wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Facilitate getting required 3.3V and 1.0V VDD supply for >>>>> EHCI controller on Exynos. >>>>> >>>>> With the patches for regulators' nodes merged in 3.15: >>>>> c8c253f ARM: dts: Add regulator entries to smdk5420 >>>>> 275dcd2 ARM: dts: add max77686 pmic node for smdk5250, >>>>> the exynos systems turn on only minimal number of regulators. >>>>> >>>>> Until now, the VDD regulator supplies were either turned on >>>>> by the bootloader, or the regulators were enabled by default >>>>> in the kernel, so that the controller drivers did not need to >>>>> care about turning on these regulators on their own. >>>>> This was rather bad about these controller drivers. >>>>> So ensuring now that the controller driver requests the necessary >>>>> VDD regulators (if available, unless there are direct VDD rails), >>>>> and enable them so as to make them working. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Vivek Gautam <gautam.vivek@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Anand Moon <linux.amoon@xxxxxxxxx> >>>>> Cc: Jingoo Han <jg1.han@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> Cc: Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> --- >>>>> Initial version of this patch was part of following series, though >>>>> they are not dependent on each other, resubmitting after rebasing. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2014-June/266418.html >>>> >>>> >>>> So you just took Vivek's patch along with all the credits... That is not >>>> how we usually do this. >>>> >>>> I would expect that rebasing a patch won't change the author unless this >>>> is fine with Vivek. >>>> >>> >>> Sorry If I have done some mistake on my part. >>> I just looked at below mail chain. Before I send it. >>> >>> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-samsung-soc/msg44136.html >> >> >> I don't get it. The patch you are referring to has a proper "From" >> field. So please use it as an example. >> >>> >>> I don't want to take any credit out of it. I just re-base on the new >>> kernel. > > Perhaps, you would have maintained the authorship ! > >>> I could not test this patch as it meant for exynos5440 boards. >> >> >> Are you sure? I think the driver is used on almost all of Exynos SoCs >> (Exynos4, Exynos5250, Exynos542x). > > > That's correct, as pointed by Krzysztof Kozlowski, the driver is same for > Exynos4 and Exynos5 series > of SoCs. > >> Untested code should not go to the kernel. Additionally you should >> mark it as not-tested. Marking such patch as non-tested could help you >> finding some independent tests (tests performed by someone else). >> >> To summarize my point of view: >> 1. Unless Vivek's says otherwise, please give him the credits with >> proper "from" field. >> 2. Issues mentioned in previous mail should be addressed (missing >> IS_ERR(), how disabling the regulator during suspend affects waking >> up). >> 3. The patchset must be tested, even after rebasing. > > > Unfortunately, I got busy with a different project and lost track of the > patches posted upstream. > If it's not too late I can post a rebased version of the patch with previous > review comments addressed. > >> >> Best regards, >> Krzysztof > > Hi All, I have learned my lesson not to interfere in others work. It will never happen from my side again. Please accept my apology. -Anand Moon -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
