From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from bali.collaboradmins.com (bali.collaboradmins.com [148.251.105.195]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C87B91F2C23; Tue, 7 Jan 2025 15:54:29 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.251.105.195 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1736265273; cv=none; b=fVTnGMPKRnqSeGAhFJnKHaILbSb4oUB9FyChJxEu0UShwP17xk0ebtK7u29i/7RXVzNxEaF1dUFUjEsSWsFSgYLNBVkKtWVfJzSCFUET28OUL1CV+NLDhWTBBoPsX2jvgFJq5ADstxZmPjrp2jAlNv6DTmuet2WA0Rp59r4b+p4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1736265273; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ZColaJchYHQUTdC5l9KMK7U/n6WVO4E0FvLAa+1L3dw=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=m5p2I3meJqgCYs/7HKUEormGVx2hgxbufCFyVk1CcyGu8IdZjhLb3DC2VsAhOh5JUbvauh5EcHVMumGJHNoLbtqhtaQERKF13xfgqpgqKXDMLo7rm2TXrKDfC9cCGPDfoZk8Rq68IiXji1v1pmRC/FynHroIUly/f0N65dkqKbU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=collabora.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=collabora.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=collabora.com header.i=@collabora.com header.b=BjYz3ER9; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.251.105.195 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=collabora.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=collabora.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=collabora.com header.i=@collabora.com header.b="BjYz3ER9" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=collabora.com; s=mail; t=1736265268; bh=ZColaJchYHQUTdC5l9KMK7U/n6WVO4E0FvLAa+1L3dw=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=BjYz3ER91eASynnII7vjuVazUWx/msHDd8cWnDw6W2GpHsDj4j0kDonsibm+9nWZh HQwp1Ng+Vt+3yUoaZtWChzzKW1Onl7QUZvgcRKLQcJVhsOu1OSutY/r3A+Umw8kTTv 1Xjks+cmkmdhd7AojIOEBuoHpEOfDtN6Fd2ClUGyq33nS5y5znS6T38Cl6S72CFx6S hn7EsbmlV5ByIj/r5klIO5Y8Rv5eAr4lU52ZmrFXWJ4iCRp+ntePNbcfJVl07/iydz NV9xXNw/92084VEFe9J86tEs31eHLXbvIdQvg6ZNZOEvf3mSTOLa9L+4QoI9s3pOTv IJEbLjlE+5zuQ== Received: from [192.168.1.100] (2-237-20-237.ip236.fastwebnet.it [2.237.20.237]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: kholk11) by bali.collaboradmins.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9081B17E159F; Tue, 7 Jan 2025 16:54:27 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2025 16:54:27 +0100 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH] v1 pinctrl: mtk-eint: add eint new design for mt8196 To: Linus Walleij Cc: chang hao , matthias.bgg@gmail.com, sean.wang@kernel.org, linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org References: <20241203131302.16022-1-ot_chhao.chang@mediatek.com> <47ca3129-245f-481f-9ca1-ed9d8db6e990@collabora.com> From: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Il 07/01/25 16:11, Linus Walleij ha scritto: > On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 1:39 PM AngeloGioacchino Del Regno > wrote: > >> Il 17/12/24 14:45, Linus Walleij ha scritto: >>> Hi Chang, >>> >>> thanks for your patch! >>> >>> On Tue, Dec 3, 2024 at 2:13 PM chang hao wrote: >>> >>>> From: Chhao Chang >>>> >>>> Change 1: change EINT from 1 address to 5 addresses, >>>> Eint number is stored on each base. >>>> Change 2: Compatible with 1 address design >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Chhao Chang >>> >>> This patch looks good to me, as preparation for mt8196, >>> but can one of the Mediatek experts please >>> review it? If nothing happens I will just apply it I guess... >>> >> >> Linus, that's something like the fourth time that he pushes variations of this >> patch which do break all MediaTek SoCs in a way or another, leaving only MT8196 >> hopefully-functional. > > That's unfortunate, and I see there is some annoyance building > up. > > The maintainers are here to protect the code and the change > would have anyway just been reverted soon if it breaks stuff. > > How can we get this contribution on a better path? > > Chhao: maybe you can split your idea into smaller changes > that can be reviewed and tested one by one? > Splitting would be nice, but I'm not sure it's really doable... besides, there's only one way to get this right: testing on older platforms! Even just one done manually, like MT8173, would be fine - the others can be tested in KernelCI as we do have many MTK SoCs in the lab. Then it's just about following the review process and adding the suggested changes - nothing in particular. Besides, I'm sorry for the very (maybe too much!) "strong" reply :-) Cheers, Angelo > Yours, > Linus Walleij