Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1252925 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] enable I2C devices behind I2C bus on Gen2

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] enable I2C devices behind I2C bus on Gen2 Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> - 2015-10-21 17:10 +0200
    Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] enable I2C devices behind I2C bus on Gen2 Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> - 2015-10-30 20:00 +0100
      Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] enable I2C devices behind I2C bus on Gen2 Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com> - 2015-10-30 20:10 +0100
        Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] enable I2C devices behind I2C bus on Gen2 Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> - 2015-10-30 20:10 +0100

#1252925 — Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] enable I2C devices behind I2C bus on Gen2

On Wed, 2015-10-07 at 13:18 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> There is a board in the wild, i.e. Intel Galileo Gen2, that has ACPI
> enumerated
> devices behind I2C bus.

Lee, since Wolfram is going to apply patches 1 and 5, how could we
proceed with the rest? Patches are indeed build independent, though
they are unified by enabling logically piece-by-piece. It would be
great if you think you may apply them to your v4.4 queue.


> This patch series dedicated to enable those devices. Meanwhile it
> also changes
> I2C core to cope with ACPI 6.0 specification (patch 1).
> 
> The MFD framework is also updated to cope with interesting
> implementation of
> the cell descriptions under ACPI MFD (patch 2).
> 
> The patches 5 and 6 are pretty independent and could be applied
> ahead, though
> they don't make much sense without previous ones.
> 
> Srinivas, it would be nice to see your tag (ideally Tested-by) to be
> sure we
> don't break ISH stuff.
> 
> Since it touches multiple subsystems someone needs to create an
> immutable
> branch. I don't actually know whose subsystem better here. Wolfram?
> 
> Tested on the actual Intel Galileo Gen2 by Ismo (gpio expanders) and
> me (at24).
> 
> Changelog v3:
> - append ACKs from Rafael (from ACPI angle)
> - drop upstreamed patches (GPIO pca953x)
> 
> Changelog v2:
> - append tags
> - re-make patch 3 (suggested by Lee)
> - improve patch 8 (suggested by Thierry)
> 
> Andy Shevchenko (5):
>   mfd: core: redo ACPI matching of the children devices
>   mfd: intel_quark_i2c_gpio: load gpio driver first
>   mfd: intel_quark_i2c_gpio: support devices behind i2c bus
>   at24: enable ACPI device found on Galileo Gen2
>   pwm-pca9685: enable ACPI device found on Galileo Gen2
> 
> Mika Westerberg (1):
>   i2c / ACPI: Rework I2C device scanning
> 
>  Documentation/acpi/enumeration.txt | 11 +++--
>  drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c             | 82 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> ----------
>  drivers/mfd/intel_quark_i2c_gpio.c | 33 ++++++++++-----
>  drivers/mfd/mfd-core.c             | 52 ++++++++++++++++--------
>  drivers/misc/eeprom/at24.c         | 22 ++++++++--
>  drivers/pwm/Kconfig                |  2 +-
>  drivers/pwm/pwm-pca9685.c          | 20 ++++++++--
>  include/linux/mfd/core.h           | 10 ++++-
>  8 files changed, 170 insertions(+), 62 deletions(-)
> 

-- 
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Intel Finland Oy

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1259716

On Wed, 21 Oct 2015, Andy Shevchenko wrote:

> On Wed, 2015-10-07 at 13:18 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > There is a board in the wild, i.e. Intel Galileo Gen2, that has ACPI
> > enumerated
> > devices behind I2C bus.
> 
> Lee, since Wolfram is going to apply patches 1 and 5, how could we
> proceed with the rest? Patches are indeed build independent, though
> they are unified by enabling logically piece-by-piece. It would be
> great if you think you may apply them to your v4.4 queue.

So we're just waiting for Thierry's Ack now, right?

> > This patch series dedicated to enable those devices. Meanwhile it
> > also changes
> > I2C core to cope with ACPI 6.0 specification (patch 1).
> > 
> > The MFD framework is also updated to cope with interesting
> > implementation of
> > the cell descriptions under ACPI MFD (patch 2).
> > 
> > The patches 5 and 6 are pretty independent and could be applied
> > ahead, though
> > they don't make much sense without previous ones.
> > 
> > Srinivas, it would be nice to see your tag (ideally Tested-by) to be
> > sure we
> > don't break ISH stuff.
> > 
> > Since it touches multiple subsystems someone needs to create an
> > immutable
> > branch. I don't actually know whose subsystem better here. Wolfram?
> > 
> > Tested on the actual Intel Galileo Gen2 by Ismo (gpio expanders) and
> > me (at24).
> > 
> > Changelog v3:
> > - append ACKs from Rafael (from ACPI angle)
> > - drop upstreamed patches (GPIO pca953x)
> > 
> > Changelog v2:
> > - append tags
> > - re-make patch 3 (suggested by Lee)
> > - improve patch 8 (suggested by Thierry)
> > 
> > Andy Shevchenko (5):
> >   mfd: core: redo ACPI matching of the children devices
> >   mfd: intel_quark_i2c_gpio: load gpio driver first
> >   mfd: intel_quark_i2c_gpio: support devices behind i2c bus
> >   at24: enable ACPI device found on Galileo Gen2
> >   pwm-pca9685: enable ACPI device found on Galileo Gen2
> > 
> > Mika Westerberg (1):
> >   i2c / ACPI: Rework I2C device scanning
> > 
> >  Documentation/acpi/enumeration.txt | 11 +++--
> >  drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c             | 82 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> > ----------
> >  drivers/mfd/intel_quark_i2c_gpio.c | 33 ++++++++++-----
> >  drivers/mfd/mfd-core.c             | 52 ++++++++++++++++--------
> >  drivers/misc/eeprom/at24.c         | 22 ++++++++--
> >  drivers/pwm/Kconfig                |  2 +-
> >  drivers/pwm/pwm-pca9685.c          | 20 ++++++++--
> >  include/linux/mfd/core.h           | 10 ++++-
> >  8 files changed, 170 insertions(+), 62 deletions(-)
> > 
> 

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1259728

On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 8:54 PM, Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Oct 2015, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 2015-10-07 at 13:18 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> > There is a board in the wild, i.e. Intel Galileo Gen2, that has ACPI
>> > enumerated
>> > devices behind I2C bus.
>>
>> Lee, since Wolfram is going to apply patches 1 and 5, how could we
>> proceed with the rest? Patches are indeed build independent, though
>> they are unified by enabling logically piece-by-piece. It would be
>> great if you think you may apply them to your v4.4 queue.
>
> So we're just waiting for Thierry's Ack now, right?

That's right. Either Ack, or he might apply patch by himself. It
wouldn't be harmful in any case.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1259732

On Fri, 30 Oct 2015, Andy Shevchenko wrote:

> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 8:54 PM, Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, 21 Oct 2015, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 2015-10-07 at 13:18 +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >> > There is a board in the wild, i.e. Intel Galileo Gen2, that has ACPI
> >> > enumerated
> >> > devices behind I2C bus.
> >>
> >> Lee, since Wolfram is going to apply patches 1 and 5, how could we
> >> proceed with the rest? Patches are indeed build independent, though
> >> they are unified by enabling logically piece-by-piece. It would be
> >> great if you think you may apply them to your v4.4 queue.
> >
> > So we're just waiting for Thierry's Ack now, right?
> 
> That's right. Either Ack, or he might apply patch by himself. It
> wouldn't be harmful in any case.

I'll give him another few days.  If we don't hear anything then I'll
apply them all bar the PWM patch.

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web