[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160121003047.GF3367@piout.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 01:30:47 +0100
From: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>
To: Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@....samsung.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Kukjin Kim <kgene@...nel.org>,
rtc-linux@...glegroups.com, Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>,
Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>,
linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] rtc: max77686: Extend driver and add max77802 support
Hi,
On 20/01/2016 at 14:14:40 -0300, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote :
> One thing that I'm not sure is how to handle bisectability, in patch #5
> there will be two drivers that matches "rtc-max77802". So I don't know
> if I should use a different platform_device_id name and change in the
> same patch that max77802 is removed or if this is not a big deal so the
> patches could stay as is.
>
I'm fine with those patches as is.
> I believe all patches should go through the RTC tree with proper acks or
> wait until the RTC patches land to pick the defconfig changes.
>
I think Olof would prefer the last patches to go through arm-soc.
--
Alexandre Belloni, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists