Thread (43 messages) 43 messages, 12 authors, 2024-05-03

Re: [PATCH v0 00/14] Make I2C terminology more inclusive for I2C Algobit and consumers

From: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>
Date: 2024-04-07 17:50:53
Also in: amd-gfx, dri-devel, intel-gfx, intel-xe, linux-i2c, linux-media, lkml, nouveau

Hi Easwar,
Sorry, got excited. :) There were drivers I'd been part of that I specifically
wanted to fixup, but then the scope grew to other users of algobit.
Well, you got some positive feedback, so that is good.
quoted
It is true that I changed quite some controller drivers within the i2c
realm. I did this to gain experience. As you also noticed quite some
questions came up. We need to agree on answers first. And once we are
happy with the answers we found, then IMO we can go outside of the i2c
realm and send patches to other subsystems referencing agreed
precedence. I intentionally did not go outside i2c yet. Since your
patches are already there, you probably want to foster them until they
are ready for inclusion.
Sorry, I don't quite follow what you mean by foster in this context. Are
you asking me to hold off on merging the series, or to follow through on
getting it merged?
I think they are your patches, so this is up to you to decide. With
"foster", I meant you keep working on them until everyone is happy. I
haven't looked at the drivers you modify. I can't tell if they can be
converted right away or if they use a lot of I2C API calls, so that it
makes sense to wait until the core is converted. I trust you to decide
this.

Happy hacking,

   Wolfram

Attachments

Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help