Hi, On Wed, Jul 8, 2020 at 3:01 AM Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 05:53:01AM -0700, Doug Anderson wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 5:08 AM Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > This doesn't apply against current code, please check and resend. > > > As mentioned in the cover letter, I posted this series against the > > Qualcomm tree. The commit that it is fixing landed there with your > > Ack so I was hoping this series could land in the Qualcomm tree with > > your Ack as well. Would that be OK? > > So I didn't see this until after the patch I applied was queued... it's > looking like it would be good to have a cross-tree merge with the > Qualcomm tree if there's stuff like this - is this on a branch which > makes that practical? Otherwise I guess... It's not too bad. Of the 5 patches I've sent out (3 for geni SPI, 2 for quad SPI) you've landed just one. Here's the summary: a) geni SPI 1/3 (Avoid clock setting): Has your Ack. b) geni SPI 2/3 (autosuspend delay): Landed in SPI tree c) geni SPI 3/3 (overhead in prepare_message): Has your Ack. d) quad SPI 1/2 (Avoid clock setting): Needs your Ack. e) quad SPI 2/2 (autosuspend delay): Needs your Ack. Since b) has already landed in your tree, let's just leave it there. There'll be a bit of a performance hit in the Qualcomm tree, but it'll still be usable. Since the rest haven't landed, it would be nice to just land them in the Qualcomm tree. I think there's still more work to make the Geni SPI driver more optimized, but I don't think it'll be as urgent as those patches and I feel like any more major work could wait a cycle. -Doug
