Hi,
On 5/24/23 08:01, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> Hello Hans,
>
> On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 10:40:43PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
>> On 5/23/23 22:00, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
>>> After commit b8a1a4cd5a98 ("i2c: Provide a temporary .probe_new()
>>> call-back type"), all drivers being converted to .probe_new() and then
>>> 03c835f498b5 ("i2c: Switch .probe() to not take an id parameter") convert
>>> back to (the new) .probe() to be able to eventually drop .probe_new() from
>>> struct i2c_driver.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> this patch was generated using coccinelle.
>>>
>>> I chose to convert all drivers below drivers/staging in a single
>>> patch, but if you prefer I can split by driver.
>>
>> I'm currently doing a lot of cleanup work on the atomisp code
>> including the sensor drivers. Specifically I'm working on
>> removing drivers which are duplicate with the standard v4l2
>> sensor drivers under drivers/media/i2c . So this patch is
>> likely to cause conflicts.
>>
>> I have my own branch for my atomisp work from which I send
>> pull-reqs directly to Mauro Chehab:
>>
>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/hansg/linux.git/log/?h=media-atomisp
>>
>> As such I think for the atomisp drivers it would be best if I directly
>> apply the atomisp bits of this patch (no need for a resend) to my
>> media-atomisp branch, is that ok with you ?
>
> For me that would be fine, it's mostly Greg who has to cope. As Jonathan
> also suggested to split, I suggest I do this. Then everyone can pickup
> the usual bits without too much conflicts.
That makes sense. I'll wait for your split up version then and
then I'll merge the atomisp bits of that version.
Regards,
Hans
