Re: [PATCHv2 0/6] mcp23s08 pinconf support

[Sebastian Reichel <sebastian.reichel@collabora.co.uk>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1832 bytes --]

Hi,

On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 10:22:24AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 4:19 PM, Sebastian Reichel
> <sebastian.reichel@collabora.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> > Back in January I sent patches adding pinconf support
> > for configuring mcp23s08's pull-ups. Apart from my
> > custom Raspberry Pi setup the pull-up support is also
> > needed by Toby Churchill SL50.
> >
> > Changes since PATCHv1:
> >  * Add patch moving mcp23s08 from gpio/ to pinctrl/
> >  * Add patches updating config references in arch/
> >  * Add patch removing pdata support for pullup config
> 
> I like this and I would like to queue it early in the v4.13
> development cycle.

Thanks.

> > I see the following merge strategies:
> >
> >  a) Ignore limited bisectability and merge all
> >     patches through their own subsystem. Compilation
> >         should always succeed, but the blackfin boards
> >         will be without mcp23s08 support with only one of
> >         patch 1 and 2 being applied.
> >  b) - Squash patch 1 & 2
> >     - Queue that patch into gpio/pinctrl
> >         - Provide immutable-branch for blackfin & arm
> >         - Blackfin & ARM can pull immutable-branch & apply defconfig patch
> >         - gpio/pinctrl can queue patch 5 & 6
> >  c) The same as b), but squash patch 1-4 to guarantee
> >     bisectability for defconfig.
> 
> Can't I just get ACKs from the blackfin and ARM SoC maintainers
> for their subsystems, merge it all into pinctrl and GPIO and provide them
> an immutable branch from pinctrl to pull in if they need it?
>
> I will anyway need to have an immutable branch between pinctrl
> and GPIO for this.
> 
> I expect ARM and blackfin can optimistically ignore my branch unless
> they get merge conflicts.

Yes, that should also work.

-- Sebastian

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]