Hi Bart,

On 18.08.2014 19:42, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:

Hi,

On Monday, July 28, 2014 08:40:52 AM Pankaj Dubey wrote:

quoted

Hi Tomasz,

On Friday, July 25, 2014 Tomasz Figa wrote:

quoted

To: Pankaj Dubey; 'Kukjin Kim'; linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org;

linux-

quoted

samsung-soc at vger.kernel.org; linux-kernel at vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux at arm.linux.org.uk; t.figa at samsung.com; vikas.sajjan at samsung.com;
joshi at samsung.com; naushad at samsung.com; thomas.ab at samsung.com;
chow.kim at samsung.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 3/4] ARM: EXYNOS: Add platform driver support for
Exynos PMU

Hi Pankaj, Kukjin,

On 25.07.2014 07:32, Pankaj Dubey wrote:

quoted

Hi Kukjin,

On Friday, July 25, 2014 Kukjin Kim wrote:

[snip]

quoted

quoted

quoted

Looks good to me, will apply this and 4/4.

We need to hold these two patches until dependent patch [1] from
Tomasz Figa gets merged.

[1]: mfd: syscon: Decouple syscon interface from syscon devices
      https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/6/24/188

That RFC patch had few comments from Arnd needed to be addressed, so it

needs a

quoted

new revision.

Pankaj, If I remember correctly, we had talked about this and the

conclusion was that

quoted

you would take care of addressing the comments and sending new version of

the

quoted

patch. Any update on this or have I missed something?

Well, I don't think we concluded as such anything.
Since this patch needs to get in so that Exynos PMU and PM related changes
can go in,
I discussed with you saying that I am not able to understand about Arnd's
comments and
if possible and time permits I will look into it. Meanwhile I got busy with
some other
official work, so could not get time to look into it.

Tomasz/Pankaj, could we please get some agreement on what needs to be
done and who should do the pending work?

syscon patch is blocking PMU cleanup patches which in turn are blocking
PMU support additions for new SoCs (Exynos5420/5800 and Exynos3250 PMU
patches).

Leaving alone the matter who is going to take care of it for now, the
remaining work to do is to further decouple syscon from struct device,
which means providing of_ API to register a syscon provider on a device
tree node even before driver model is available yet.

I believe it should be quite straightforward on top of my RFC and should
require only saving syscon's of_node directly in syscon struct, adding
appropriate API and extending the look-up loops to handle cases when
syscon's dev is NULL.

Best regards,
Tomasz