[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20141007191819.GI5042@pengutronix.de>
Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2014 21:18:19 +0200
From: Markus Pargmann <mpa@...gutronix.de>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kernel@...gutronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] regulator: Add ena_gpio_valid config
On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 05:19:33PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 03:03:20PM +0200, Markus Pargmann wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 12:53:35PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > > This should be part of the patch adding meaningful behaviour for the
> > > flag, it's pointless separately.
>
> > I tried to keep the series bisectable while having different patches for
> > the drivers and the core. By splitting this 'ena_gpio_valid' field into
> > a seperate patch, the rest of the drivers will still compile and work
> > until the core condition was changed to ena_gpio_valid.
>
> > But I can squash the three patches into one.
>
> No, I think this is missing the point a bit - if we need to introduce
> this such that all drivers are instantly buggy without an update that's
> probably an indication that we're introducing compatibility problems.
Yes, it was designed to not be compatible with the old way of setting up
ena_gpio. But I think it shouldn't be a problem to get it backwads
compatible. I will fix the series and send the next version with one
core patch and another one which adds ena_gpio_valid to the drivers.
Thanks,
Markus
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists