ac100 team mailing list archive
Mailing list archive
Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] dt: paz00: define nvec as child of i2c bus
Marc Dietrich <marvin24@xxxxxx>, Stephen Warren <swarren@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Wolfram Sang <wsa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Andrey Danin <danindrey@xxxxxxx>
Tue, 21 Jul 2015 11:51:15 +0300
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@xxxxxxx>, devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, ac100@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Russell King <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@xxxxxxx>, Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Julian Andres Klode <jak@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Rob Herring <robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>, Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@xxxxxxxxxx>, Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@xxxxxxxxx>, linux-i2c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Kumar Gala <galak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-tegra@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@xxxxxxxxx>, linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
On 21.07.2015 11:25, Marc Dietrich wrote:
First patch only adds slave functionality to tegra-i2c driver. I sent v3
to fix only tegra-i2c as Wolfram suggested.
I think in this case it would be better to leave nvec and dt as it is for now,
and just add the slave function to tegra-i2c. Otherwise we will again have two
different "nvidia,nvec-slave" bindings (one for the intermediate hack and one
for the final representation). As an alternative, you could also add slave
function and port nvec in the same series.
Unfortunately I haven't fixed all defects and I will resend patch(es).
I can resend only first patch (for tegra-i2c) if it is more obvious for