Hi,
On 15-01-17 12:45, Wolfram Sang wrote:
Hi Hans,
So Wolfram, what is the plan with these ? As said they are necessary
for the 2 i2c patches in this patch-set, so do you want the
entire set of 8 i2c patches to go through an other tree to avoid
inter tree dependencies ?
Thanks for the heads up. So, my plan was that I send a pull request for
4.10 any minute now, and start pulling in patches for 4.11 based on
shiny new rc4 from tomorrow on. And your series would have been one of
the fist to get merged because I think it is ready.
Reading this though, my feeling is now that it should be merged via some
other tree so you can get these nasty issues fixed without too many
dependencies. An immutable branch for me to pull in would be great,
though.
Makes sense?
Sounds fine to me, step one is to get consensus on how to deal with
coordinating the kernel directly accessing to the pmic-i2c-bus vs punit
accesses which also end up needing to use the same i2c-bus from the
punit side.
Once I've a patch-set everyone likes I will start talking to people
to coordinate the merging, I believe it is probably best for all this
to be merged through the drm-intel tree. But we'll see about that
when the patch-set is ready.
Regards,
Hans
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
