lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Jan]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v5 0/7] mfd / platform: cros_ec: move cros_ec sysfs attributes to its own drivers.
From
Date
Hi Lee,

On 9/1/19 8:25, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Tue, 08 Jan 2019, Enric Balletbo Serra wrote:
>> Missatge de Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> del dia dv., 21 de des.
>> 2018 a les 16:39:
>>>
>>> On Wed, 12 Dec 2018, Enric Balletbo i Serra wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> This is another patchset to try to cleanup a bit more the crossed
>>>> references for cros-ec driver between the MFD and the platform/chrome
>>>> subsystems.
>>>>
>>>> The purpose of these patches is get rid of the different cros-ec attributes
>>>> from mfd/cros_ec_dev to its own sub-driver in platform/chrome. cros_ec_dev
>>>> continues instantiating the sub-devices but the sysfs attributes are owned
>>>> by the platform driver.E.g. The lightbar driver should own his sysfs
>>>> attributes and be instantiated only if the Embedded Controller has a
>>>> lightbar.
>>>>
>>>> The patchset also adds the documentation of the sysfs attributes.
>>>>
>>>> Most of the patches touches mfd subsystem and platform/chrome so I'd
>>>> suggest go all using and inmutable branch.
>>>
>>> That's fine.
>>>
>>> What else needs to happen with this set?
>>
>> I think the patchset is ready to be queued. Note that to apply cleanly
>> it depends on [1] which is already merged in your for-next branch.
>> What do you prefer, go through your repo or go through the
>> chrome-platform repo? Do you want Benson or I create an immutable
>> branch? I'm fine with whenever you decide.
>
> Probably best if this goes through the MFD tree.
>

Sounds good to me, thanks
Enric

> I have a PR pending upstream at the moment. Once I know what is
> happening with that, I'll start taking patches/sets again.
>
>> [1]
>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/lee/mfd.git/commit/?h=for-mfd-next&id=18e294ddafaeb80a1e2e10c9bd750a6cb8388d5b
>>
>>> Any more Acks required?
>>>
>>
>> I think that you, Guenter, Benson and I are fine with it, so not more
>> acks needed.
>
> Thanks for the clarification.
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-01-09 10:16    [W:0.056 / U:12.816 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site