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

Groups > linux.kernel > #1435174 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH v8 2/7] Input: cros_ec_keyb - Stop handling interrupts directly

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 v8 2/7] Input: cros_ec_keyb - Stop handling interrupts directly Enric Balletbo Serra <eballetbo@gmail.com> - 2016-07-01 11:00 +0200
    Re: [PATCH v8 2/7] Input: cros_ec_keyb - Stop handling interrupts directly Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com> - 2016-07-04 13:30 +0200

#1435174 — Re: [PATCH v8 2/7] Input: cros_ec_keyb - Stop handling interrupts directly

Hi Tomeu,

2016-04-26 9:06 GMT+02:00 Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com>:
> On 26 April 2016 at 08:57, Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> wrote:
>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2016, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
>>
>>> On 25 April 2016 at 23:17, Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 02:32:25PM +0200, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
>>> >> From: Vic Yang <victoryang@google.com>
>>> >>
>>> >> Because events other that keyboard ones will be handled by now on by
>>> >> other drivers, stop directly handling interrupts and instead listen to
>>> >> the new notifier in the MFD driver.
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > Hmm, where did Vic's sign-off go?
>>>
>>> Lee Jones asked to remove them in a previous version as he considers
>>> them superfluous. My understanding is that as I'm the first to submit
>>> them to mainline, the chain starts with me (I certify the b section of
>>> http://developercertificate.org/).
>>
>> Hmm... It seems what I said has been misconstrued a little.  You
>> *should* remove SoBs from people who were *only* part of the
>> submission path.  However, you should *not* remove SoBs from patch
>> *authors*.  Since Vic is the author (or at least one of them), their
>> SoB should remain.
>>
>> Apologies if that was not clear.
>
> I see now, will fix the tags in the next revision.
>

With your permission I'll fix this and send a new patch series with
only the patch that adds the MKBP event support and this patch. These
two patches has sense by itself and are only a dependency of cros-ec
USB PD driver and other drivers, so I think makes sense send within a
separate series to increase the possibility to get merged and don't
block other drivers that depends on these.

Thanks,

Enric


> Thanks,
>
> Tomeu

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1436411

On 1 July 2016 at 10:49, Enric Balletbo Serra <eballetbo@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Tomeu,
>
> 2016-04-26 9:06 GMT+02:00 Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com>:
>> On 26 April 2016 at 08:57, Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2016, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 25 April 2016 at 23:17, Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> > On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 02:32:25PM +0200, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
>>>> >> From: Vic Yang <victoryang@google.com>
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Because events other that keyboard ones will be handled by now on by
>>>> >> other drivers, stop directly handling interrupts and instead listen to
>>>> >> the new notifier in the MFD driver.
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>> > Hmm, where did Vic's sign-off go?
>>>>
>>>> Lee Jones asked to remove them in a previous version as he considers
>>>> them superfluous. My understanding is that as I'm the first to submit
>>>> them to mainline, the chain starts with me (I certify the b section of
>>>> http://developercertificate.org/).
>>>
>>> Hmm... It seems what I said has been misconstrued a little.  You
>>> *should* remove SoBs from people who were *only* part of the
>>> submission path.  However, you should *not* remove SoBs from patch
>>> *authors*.  Since Vic is the author (or at least one of them), their
>>> SoB should remain.
>>>
>>> Apologies if that was not clear.
>>
>> I see now, will fix the tags in the next revision.
>>
>
> With your permission I'll fix this and send a new patch series with
> only the patch that adds the MKBP event support and this patch. These
> two patches has sense by itself and are only a dependency of cros-ec
> USB PD driver and other drivers, so I think makes sense send within a
> separate series to increase the possibility to get merged and don't
> block other drivers that depends on these.

Sounds great, MKBP event support is indeed a dependency for the
upcoming features that we want to upstream.

Thanks,

Tomeu

> Thanks,
>
> Enric
>
>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Tomeu

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web