Re: [PATCH 0/4] spi: s3c64xx: add support for google,gs101-spi

On 2/6/24 18:59, Sam Protsenko wrote:

On Tue, Feb 6, 2024 at 2:52 AM Tudor Ambarus [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Depends on the simple cleanup patches from:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-spi/20240205124513.447875-1-tudor.ambarus@linaro.org/ (local)

A slightly different version of the google,gs101-spi support was sent at:
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-spi/20240125145007.748295-1-tudor.ambarus@linaro.org/ (local)

Let's add support for gs101-spi so that I have a testing base for the
driver rework patches that will follow.

Tudor Ambarus (4):
  spi: s3c64xx: explicitly include <linux/types.h>
  spi: dt-bindings: samsung: add google,gs101-spi compatible
  spi: s3c64xx: add s3c64xx_iowrite{8,16}_32_rep accessors
  spi: s3c64xx: add support for google,gs101-spi

Just a grumpy note: I wish this series (except for the [PATCH 1/4],
which I'd argue doesn't belong here) was submitted before the rest of
SPI cleanups and reworkings. Would've made reviewing much easier,
because this series doesn't apply without SPI cleanup series that has
to be applied prior to that. There are other benefits to that approach
too, as was discussed earlier.

I feel we're bike-shedding, it drains my energy. Your reasons were:
1/ easier review
2/ easier backporting of gs101 if that's ever wanted
3/ driver rework takes more review time and I risk not having gs101
integrated for next release

2/ is not true right now, I could cherry-pick the iowrite and gs101
patches on top of v6.7. With 1/ I don't agree as the gs101 patches are
the same with or without the simple cleanup.
3/ is my responsibility and I'm ok with it, I feel there's enough time
for all

What matters, as I specified in the cover letter, is to have the gs101
patches before the functional driver rework which will follow, so that I
can test each functional patch with gs101.

I give up however, I'll do as you want. Will respin all.