| Message ID | 20210520140928.3252671-1-djrscally@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | Introduce intel_skl_int3472 module | expand |
Hi Daniel, On 5/20/21 4:09 PM, Daniel Scally wrote: > Hello all > > Apologies for the long delay since the last version of this series; the time I > had free to work on it became somewhat restrained. No worries, thank you for all the work you are putting into this. I have not taken a close look at the code yet, but I see that Andy has and the amount of remarks which he has on patch 7/8 which is the big one seems to be limited, so I believe that we are getting close to this being ready for merging. This touches a lot of subsystems, so we need to come up with a plan to merge this. Here is my proposal for how to do this: 1/8 ACPI: scan: Extend acpi_walk_dep_device_list() 2/8 ACPI: scan: Add function to fetch dependent of acpi device 3/8 i2c: core: Add a format macro for I2C device names 4/8 gpiolib: acpi: Export acpi_get_gpiod() 5/8 clkdev: Make clkdev_drop() null aware 6/8 gpiolib: acpi: Add acpi_gpio_get_io_resource() 7/8 platform/x86: Add intel_skl_int3472 driver 8/8 mfd: tps68470: Remove tps68470 MFD driver Rafael already indicated that he wants to merge 1/8 (and presumably also 2/8) through his tree and that he will provide an immutable branch with those for merging into the pdx86 tree. 4/8 and 6/8 are both gpiolib-acpi patches and seem to be ready for merging now, perhaps the gpiolib-acpi maintainers can already merge these and also provide an immutable branch ? Andy/Mika ? 3/8 and 5/8 seem to be nice cleanups, but not really necessary. IMHO it would be best to park these cleanups for later and for 3/8 add the following where necessary for now: /* FIXME drop this once the I2C_DEV_NAME_FORMAT macro has been added to include/linux/i2c.h */ #ifndef I2C_DEV_NAME_FORMAT #define I2C_DEV_NAME_FORMAT "i2c-%s" #endif This is not the prettiest but it reduces all the subsys cross-deps and things like this have been done before for similar reasons. Likewise it would be good if you can add if (foo) as condition before any clkdev_drop(foo) calls in this patch-set and then merge 5/8 "clkdev: Make clkdev_drop() null aware" independently of this and then once both are in Linux tree follow-up with a cleanup patch dropping the if (foo) guards. So this would leave as deps for 7/8 just the 2 ACPI and 2 gpiolib-acpi patches which I can hopefully pull-in via immutable branches and then we are good. AFAICT patch 8/8 can be merged independently once 7/8 hits for-next (IOW once we are sure the next kernel will have 7/8). Or alternatively one of the involved subsys maintainers just merges the entire set (once it is ready) and then provides an immutable branch with the entire set on top of 5.13-rc1 (or 5.14-rc1). But that requires acks from all the other subsys maintainers. Note I'm fine with either approach. Regards, Hans > v1 for this series was originally 14-18 of this series: > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-media/20201130133129.1024662-1-djrscally@gmail.com/T/#m91934e12e3d033da2e768e952ea3b4a125ee3e67 > > v2 was here: > https://lore.kernel.org/platform-driver-x86/20210118003428.568892-1-djrscally@gmail.com/ > > v3 was here: > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210222130735.1313443-1-djrscally@gmail.com/ > > Series level changelog: > > - Added patch 5/8 to make clkdev_drop() NULL aware to simplify error > handling. > - Added patch 6/8 to add acpi_gpio_get_io_resource(). > > This has been tested on a number of devices, but currently **not** on a device > designed for ChromeOS, which we ideally need to do to ensure no regression > caused by replacing the tps68470 MFD driver. Unfortunately, I don't have a > device to test it on myself. > > =========== Original Cover Letter =========== > > At the moment in the kernel the ACPI _HID INT3472 is taken by the tps68470 > MFD driver, but that driver can only handle some of the cases of that _HID > that we see. There are at least these three possibilities: > > 1. INT3472 devices that provide GPIOs through the usual framework and run > power and clocks through an operation region; this is the situation that > the current module handles and is seen on ChromeOS devices > 2. INT3472 devices that provide GPIOs, plus clocks and regulators that are > meant to be driven through the usual frameworks, usually seen on devices > designed to run Windows > 3. INT3472 devices that don't actually represent a physical tps68470, but > are being used as a convenient way of grouping a bunch of system GPIO > lines that are intended to enable power and clocks for sensors which > are called out as dependent on them. Also seen on devices designed to > run Windows. > > This series introduces a new module which registers: > > 1. An i2c driver that determines which scenario (#1 or #2) applies to the > machine and registers platform devices to be bound to GPIO, OpRegion, > clock and regulator drivers as appropriate. > 2. A platform driver that binds to the dummy INT3472 devices described in > #3 > > The platform driver for the dummy device registers the GPIO lines that > enable the clocks and regulators to the sensors via those frameworks so > that sensor drivers can consume them in the usual fashion. The existing > GPIO and OpRegion tps68470 drivers will work with the i2c driver that's > registered. Clock and regulator drivers are available but have not so far been > tested, so aren't part of this series. > > The existing mfd/tps68470.c driver being thus superseded, it is removed. > > Thanks > Dan > > Daniel Scally (8): > ACPI: scan: Extend acpi_walk_dep_device_list() > ACPI: scan: Add function to fetch dependent of acpi device > i2c: core: Add a format macro for I2C device names > gpiolib: acpi: Export acpi_get_gpiod() > clkdev: Make clkdev_drop() null aware > gpiolib: acpi: Add acpi_gpio_get_io_resource() > platform/x86: Add intel_skl_int3472 driver > mfd: tps68470: Remove tps68470 MFD driver > > MAINTAINERS | 5 + > drivers/acpi/ec.c | 2 +- > drivers/acpi/pmic/Kconfig | 2 +- > drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic_chtdc_ti.c | 2 +- > drivers/acpi/scan.c | 107 ++++- > drivers/clk/clkdev.c | 3 + > drivers/gpio/Kconfig | 2 +- > drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c | 61 ++- > drivers/i2c/i2c-core-acpi.c | 8 +- > drivers/i2c/i2c-core-base.c | 4 +- > drivers/mfd/Kconfig | 18 - > drivers/mfd/Makefile | 1 - > drivers/mfd/tps68470.c | 97 ----- > drivers/platform/surface/aggregator/core.c | 6 +- > drivers/platform/surface/surface3_power.c | 22 +- > .../platform/surface/surface_acpi_notify.c | 7 +- > drivers/platform/x86/Kconfig | 2 + > drivers/platform/x86/Makefile | 1 + > drivers/platform/x86/intel-int3472/Kconfig | 31 ++ > drivers/platform/x86/intel-int3472/Makefile | 5 + > .../intel_skl_int3472_clk_and_regulator.c | 195 +++++++++ > .../intel-int3472/intel_skl_int3472_common.c | 106 +++++ > .../intel-int3472/intel_skl_int3472_common.h | 113 +++++ > .../intel_skl_int3472_discrete.c | 409 ++++++++++++++++++ > .../intel_skl_int3472_tps68470.c | 109 +++++ > include/acpi/acpi_bus.h | 8 + > include/linux/acpi.h | 11 +- > include/linux/gpio/consumer.h | 2 + > include/linux/i2c.h | 3 + > 29 files changed, 1175 insertions(+), 167 deletions(-) > delete mode 100644 drivers/mfd/tps68470.c > create mode 100644 drivers/platform/x86/intel-int3472/Kconfig > create mode 100644 drivers/platform/x86/intel-int3472/Makefile > create mode 100644 drivers/platform/x86/intel-int3472/intel_skl_int3472_clk_and_regulator.c > create mode 100644 drivers/platform/x86/intel-int3472/intel_skl_int3472_common.c > create mode 100644 drivers/platform/x86/intel-int3472/intel_skl_int3472_common.h > create mode 100644 drivers/platform/x86/intel-int3472/intel_skl_int3472_discrete.c > create mode 100644 drivers/platform/x86/intel-int3472/intel_skl_int3472_tps68470.c >
Hi again, On 5/25/21 3:10 PM, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > On 5/20/21 4:09 PM, Daniel Scally wrote: >> Hello all >> >> Apologies for the long delay since the last version of this series; the time I >> had free to work on it became somewhat restrained. > > No worries, thank you for all the work you are putting into this. > > I have not taken a close look at the code yet, but I see that Andy has and > the amount of remarks which he has on patch 7/8 which is the big one seems > to be limited, so I believe that we are getting close to this being ready > for merging. > > This touches a lot of subsystems, so we need to come up with a plan to > merge this. Here is my proposal for how to do this: > > 1/8 ACPI: scan: Extend acpi_walk_dep_device_list() > 2/8 ACPI: scan: Add function to fetch dependent of acpi device > 3/8 i2c: core: Add a format macro for I2C device names > 4/8 gpiolib: acpi: Export acpi_get_gpiod() > 5/8 clkdev: Make clkdev_drop() null aware > 6/8 gpiolib: acpi: Add acpi_gpio_get_io_resource() > 7/8 platform/x86: Add intel_skl_int3472 driver > 8/8 mfd: tps68470: Remove tps68470 MFD driver > > Rafael already indicated that he wants to merge 1/8 (and presumably also 2/8) > through his tree and that he will provide an immutable branch with those > for merging into the pdx86 tree. p.s. Daniel it would be good if you can at least send a v5 of patch 2/8 with the suggested renames, then Rafael can merge 1/8 + 2/8 and we are down to 6 patches (4 if we also merge the i2c + clk patches independently). Regards, Hans > 4/8 and 6/8 are both gpiolib-acpi patches and seem to be ready for merging > now, perhaps the gpiolib-acpi maintainers can already merge these and also > provide an immutable branch ? Andy/Mika ? > > 3/8 and 5/8 seem to be nice cleanups, but not really necessary. IMHO it > would be best to park these cleanups for later and for 3/8 add the following > where necessary for now: > > /* FIXME drop this once the I2C_DEV_NAME_FORMAT macro has been added to include/linux/i2c.h */ > #ifndef I2C_DEV_NAME_FORMAT > #define I2C_DEV_NAME_FORMAT "i2c-%s" > #endif > > This is not the prettiest but it reduces all the subsys cross-deps and things > like this have been done before for similar reasons. > > Likewise it would be good if you can add if (foo) as condition before any > clkdev_drop(foo) calls in this patch-set and then merge > 5/8 "clkdev: Make clkdev_drop() null aware" independently of this and then > once both are in Linux tree follow-up with a cleanup patch dropping the if (foo) > guards. > > So this would leave as deps for 7/8 just the 2 ACPI and 2 gpiolib-acpi patches > which I can hopefully pull-in via immutable branches and then we are good. > > AFAICT patch 8/8 can be merged independently once 7/8 hits for-next (IOW once > we are sure the next kernel will have 7/8). > > > > Or alternatively one of the involved subsys maintainers just merges the entire > set (once it is ready) and then provides an immutable branch with the entire set > on top of 5.13-rc1 (or 5.14-rc1). But that requires acks from all the other > subsys maintainers. Note I'm fine with either approach. > > Regards, > > Hans > > > > > >> v1 for this series was originally 14-18 of this series: >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-media/20201130133129.1024662-1-djrscally@gmail.com/T/#m91934e12e3d033da2e768e952ea3b4a125ee3e67 >> >> v2 was here: >> https://lore.kernel.org/platform-driver-x86/20210118003428.568892-1-djrscally@gmail.com/ >> >> v3 was here: >> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210222130735.1313443-1-djrscally@gmail.com/ >> >> Series level changelog: >> >> - Added patch 5/8 to make clkdev_drop() NULL aware to simplify error >> handling. >> - Added patch 6/8 to add acpi_gpio_get_io_resource(). >> >> This has been tested on a number of devices, but currently **not** on a device >> designed for ChromeOS, which we ideally need to do to ensure no regression >> caused by replacing the tps68470 MFD driver. Unfortunately, I don't have a >> device to test it on myself. >> >> =========== Original Cover Letter =========== >> >> At the moment in the kernel the ACPI _HID INT3472 is taken by the tps68470 >> MFD driver, but that driver can only handle some of the cases of that _HID >> that we see. There are at least these three possibilities: >> >> 1. INT3472 devices that provide GPIOs through the usual framework and run >> power and clocks through an operation region; this is the situation that >> the current module handles and is seen on ChromeOS devices >> 2. INT3472 devices that provide GPIOs, plus clocks and regulators that are >> meant to be driven through the usual frameworks, usually seen on devices >> designed to run Windows >> 3. INT3472 devices that don't actually represent a physical tps68470, but >> are being used as a convenient way of grouping a bunch of system GPIO >> lines that are intended to enable power and clocks for sensors which >> are called out as dependent on them. Also seen on devices designed to >> run Windows. >> >> This series introduces a new module which registers: >> >> 1. An i2c driver that determines which scenario (#1 or #2) applies to the >> machine and registers platform devices to be bound to GPIO, OpRegion, >> clock and regulator drivers as appropriate. >> 2. A platform driver that binds to the dummy INT3472 devices described in >> #3 >> >> The platform driver for the dummy device registers the GPIO lines that >> enable the clocks and regulators to the sensors via those frameworks so >> that sensor drivers can consume them in the usual fashion. The existing >> GPIO and OpRegion tps68470 drivers will work with the i2c driver that's >> registered. Clock and regulator drivers are available but have not so far been >> tested, so aren't part of this series. >> >> The existing mfd/tps68470.c driver being thus superseded, it is removed. >> >> Thanks >> Dan >> >> Daniel Scally (8): >> ACPI: scan: Extend acpi_walk_dep_device_list() >> ACPI: scan: Add function to fetch dependent of acpi device >> i2c: core: Add a format macro for I2C device names >> gpiolib: acpi: Export acpi_get_gpiod() >> clkdev: Make clkdev_drop() null aware >> gpiolib: acpi: Add acpi_gpio_get_io_resource() >> platform/x86: Add intel_skl_int3472 driver >> mfd: tps68470: Remove tps68470 MFD driver >> >> MAINTAINERS | 5 + >> drivers/acpi/ec.c | 2 +- >> drivers/acpi/pmic/Kconfig | 2 +- >> drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic_chtdc_ti.c | 2 +- >> drivers/acpi/scan.c | 107 ++++- >> drivers/clk/clkdev.c | 3 + >> drivers/gpio/Kconfig | 2 +- >> drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c | 61 ++- >> drivers/i2c/i2c-core-acpi.c | 8 +- >> drivers/i2c/i2c-core-base.c | 4 +- >> drivers/mfd/Kconfig | 18 - >> drivers/mfd/Makefile | 1 - >> drivers/mfd/tps68470.c | 97 ----- >> drivers/platform/surface/aggregator/core.c | 6 +- >> drivers/platform/surface/surface3_power.c | 22 +- >> .../platform/surface/surface_acpi_notify.c | 7 +- >> drivers/platform/x86/Kconfig | 2 + >> drivers/platform/x86/Makefile | 1 + >> drivers/platform/x86/intel-int3472/Kconfig | 31 ++ >> drivers/platform/x86/intel-int3472/Makefile | 5 + >> .../intel_skl_int3472_clk_and_regulator.c | 195 +++++++++ >> .../intel-int3472/intel_skl_int3472_common.c | 106 +++++ >> .../intel-int3472/intel_skl_int3472_common.h | 113 +++++ >> .../intel_skl_int3472_discrete.c | 409 ++++++++++++++++++ >> .../intel_skl_int3472_tps68470.c | 109 +++++ >> include/acpi/acpi_bus.h | 8 + >> include/linux/acpi.h | 11 +- >> include/linux/gpio/consumer.h | 2 + >> include/linux/i2c.h | 3 + >> 29 files changed, 1175 insertions(+), 167 deletions(-) >> delete mode 100644 drivers/mfd/tps68470.c >> create mode 100644 drivers/platform/x86/intel-int3472/Kconfig >> create mode 100644 drivers/platform/x86/intel-int3472/Makefile >> create mode 100644 drivers/platform/x86/intel-int3472/intel_skl_int3472_clk_and_regulator.c >> create mode 100644 drivers/platform/x86/intel-int3472/intel_skl_int3472_common.c >> create mode 100644 drivers/platform/x86/intel-int3472/intel_skl_int3472_common.h >> create mode 100644 drivers/platform/x86/intel-int3472/intel_skl_int3472_discrete.c >> create mode 100644 drivers/platform/x86/intel-int3472/intel_skl_int3472_tps68470.c >>
On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 03:12:45PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > On 5/25/21 3:10 PM, Hans de Goede wrote: > > On 5/20/21 4:09 PM, Daniel Scally wrote: > >> Apologies for the long delay since the last version of this series; the time I > >> had free to work on it became somewhat restrained. > > > > No worries, thank you for all the work you are putting into this. > > > > I have not taken a close look at the code yet, but I see that Andy has and > > the amount of remarks which he has on patch 7/8 which is the big one seems > > to be limited, so I believe that we are getting close to this being ready > > for merging. > > > > This touches a lot of subsystems, so we need to come up with a plan to > > merge this. Here is my proposal for how to do this: > > > > 1/8 ACPI: scan: Extend acpi_walk_dep_device_list() > > 2/8 ACPI: scan: Add function to fetch dependent of acpi device > > 3/8 i2c: core: Add a format macro for I2C device names > > 4/8 gpiolib: acpi: Export acpi_get_gpiod() > > 5/8 clkdev: Make clkdev_drop() null aware > > 6/8 gpiolib: acpi: Add acpi_gpio_get_io_resource() > > 7/8 platform/x86: Add intel_skl_int3472 driver > > 8/8 mfd: tps68470: Remove tps68470 MFD driver > > > > Rafael already indicated that he wants to merge 1/8 (and presumably also 2/8) > > through his tree and that he will provide an immutable branch with those > > for merging into the pdx86 tree. > > p.s. > > Daniel it would be good if you can at least send a v5 of patch 2/8 with > the suggested renames, then Rafael can merge 1/8 + 2/8 and we are down to 6 > patches (4 if we also merge the i2c + clk patches independently). I would also prefer GPIO ACPI patches to be grouped together, so I can simply take them in a row. > > 4/8 and 6/8 are both gpiolib-acpi patches and seem to be ready for merging > > now, perhaps the gpiolib-acpi maintainers can already merge these and also > > provide an immutable branch ? Andy/Mika ? Fine with me. Just need Mika's Ack / Rb tag. > > 3/8 and 5/8 seem to be nice cleanups, but not really necessary. IMHO it > > would be best to park these cleanups for later and for 3/8 add the following > > where necessary for now: > > > > /* FIXME drop this once the I2C_DEV_NAME_FORMAT macro has been added to include/linux/i2c.h */ > > #ifndef I2C_DEV_NAME_FORMAT > > #define I2C_DEV_NAME_FORMAT "i2c-%s" > > #endif > > > > This is not the prettiest but it reduces all the subsys cross-deps and things > > like this have been done before for similar reasons. > > > > Likewise it would be good if you can add if (foo) as condition before any > > clkdev_drop(foo) calls in this patch-set and then merge > > 5/8 "clkdev: Make clkdev_drop() null aware" independently of this and then > > once both are in Linux tree follow-up with a cleanup patch dropping the if (foo) > > guards. > > > > So this would leave as deps for 7/8 just the 2 ACPI and 2 gpiolib-acpi patches > > which I can hopefully pull-in via immutable branches and then we are good. > > > > AFAICT patch 8/8 can be merged independently once 7/8 hits for-next (IOW once > > we are sure the next kernel will have 7/8). > > > > Or alternatively one of the involved subsys maintainers just merges the entire > > set (once it is ready) and then provides an immutable branch with the entire set > > on top of 5.13-rc1 (or 5.14-rc1). But that requires acks from all the other > > subsys maintainers. Note I'm fine with either approach. > >> v1 for this series was originally 14-18 of this series: > >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-media/20201130133129.1024662-1-djrscally@gmail.com/T/#m91934e12e3d033da2e768e952ea3b4a125ee3e67 > >> > >> v2 was here: > >> https://lore.kernel.org/platform-driver-x86/20210118003428.568892-1-djrscally@gmail.com/ > >> > >> v3 was here: > >> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210222130735.1313443-1-djrscally@gmail.com/ > >> > >> Series level changelog: > >> > >> - Added patch 5/8 to make clkdev_drop() NULL aware to simplify error > >> handling. > >> - Added patch 6/8 to add acpi_gpio_get_io_resource(). > >> > >> This has been tested on a number of devices, but currently **not** on a device > >> designed for ChromeOS, which we ideally need to do to ensure no regression > >> caused by replacing the tps68470 MFD driver. Unfortunately, I don't have a > >> device to test it on myself. > >> > >> =========== Original Cover Letter =========== > >> > >> At the moment in the kernel the ACPI _HID INT3472 is taken by the tps68470 > >> MFD driver, but that driver can only handle some of the cases of that _HID > >> that we see. There are at least these three possibilities: > >> > >> 1. INT3472 devices that provide GPIOs through the usual framework and run > >> power and clocks through an operation region; this is the situation that > >> the current module handles and is seen on ChromeOS devices > >> 2. INT3472 devices that provide GPIOs, plus clocks and regulators that are > >> meant to be driven through the usual frameworks, usually seen on devices > >> designed to run Windows > >> 3. INT3472 devices that don't actually represent a physical tps68470, but > >> are being used as a convenient way of grouping a bunch of system GPIO > >> lines that are intended to enable power and clocks for sensors which > >> are called out as dependent on them. Also seen on devices designed to > >> run Windows. > >> > >> This series introduces a new module which registers: > >> > >> 1. An i2c driver that determines which scenario (#1 or #2) applies to the > >> machine and registers platform devices to be bound to GPIO, OpRegion, > >> clock and regulator drivers as appropriate. > >> 2. A platform driver that binds to the dummy INT3472 devices described in > >> #3 > >> > >> The platform driver for the dummy device registers the GPIO lines that > >> enable the clocks and regulators to the sensors via those frameworks so > >> that sensor drivers can consume them in the usual fashion. The existing > >> GPIO and OpRegion tps68470 drivers will work with the i2c driver that's > >> registered. Clock and regulator drivers are available but have not so far been > >> tested, so aren't part of this series. > >> > >> The existing mfd/tps68470.c driver being thus superseded, it is removed. > >> > >> Thanks > >> Dan > >> > >> Daniel Scally (8): > >> ACPI: scan: Extend acpi_walk_dep_device_list() > >> ACPI: scan: Add function to fetch dependent of acpi device > >> i2c: core: Add a format macro for I2C device names > >> gpiolib: acpi: Export acpi_get_gpiod() > >> clkdev: Make clkdev_drop() null aware > >> gpiolib: acpi: Add acpi_gpio_get_io_resource() > >> platform/x86: Add intel_skl_int3472 driver > >> mfd: tps68470: Remove tps68470 MFD driver > >> > >> MAINTAINERS | 5 + > >> drivers/acpi/ec.c | 2 +- > >> drivers/acpi/pmic/Kconfig | 2 +- > >> drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic_chtdc_ti.c | 2 +- > >> drivers/acpi/scan.c | 107 ++++- > >> drivers/clk/clkdev.c | 3 + > >> drivers/gpio/Kconfig | 2 +- > >> drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c | 61 ++- > >> drivers/i2c/i2c-core-acpi.c | 8 +- > >> drivers/i2c/i2c-core-base.c | 4 +- > >> drivers/mfd/Kconfig | 18 - > >> drivers/mfd/Makefile | 1 - > >> drivers/mfd/tps68470.c | 97 ----- > >> drivers/platform/surface/aggregator/core.c | 6 +- > >> drivers/platform/surface/surface3_power.c | 22 +- > >> .../platform/surface/surface_acpi_notify.c | 7 +- > >> drivers/platform/x86/Kconfig | 2 + > >> drivers/platform/x86/Makefile | 1 + > >> drivers/platform/x86/intel-int3472/Kconfig | 31 ++ > >> drivers/platform/x86/intel-int3472/Makefile | 5 + > >> .../intel_skl_int3472_clk_and_regulator.c | 195 +++++++++ > >> .../intel-int3472/intel_skl_int3472_common.c | 106 +++++ > >> .../intel-int3472/intel_skl_int3472_common.h | 113 +++++ > >> .../intel_skl_int3472_discrete.c | 409 ++++++++++++++++++ > >> .../intel_skl_int3472_tps68470.c | 109 +++++ > >> include/acpi/acpi_bus.h | 8 + > >> include/linux/acpi.h | 11 +- > >> include/linux/gpio/consumer.h | 2 + > >> include/linux/i2c.h | 3 + > >> 29 files changed, 1175 insertions(+), 167 deletions(-) > >> delete mode 100644 drivers/mfd/tps68470.c > >> create mode 100644 drivers/platform/x86/intel-int3472/Kconfig > >> create mode 100644 drivers/platform/x86/intel-int3472/Makefile > >> create mode 100644 drivers/platform/x86/intel-int3472/intel_skl_int3472_clk_and_regulator.c > >> create mode 100644 drivers/platform/x86/intel-int3472/intel_skl_int3472_common.c > >> create mode 100644 drivers/platform/x86/intel-int3472/intel_skl_int3472_common.h > >> create mode 100644 drivers/platform/x86/intel-int3472/intel_skl_int3472_discrete.c > >> create mode 100644 drivers/platform/x86/intel-int3472/intel_skl_int3472_tps68470.c > >> >
Hi Hans On 25/05/2021 14:10, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > On 5/20/21 4:09 PM, Daniel Scally wrote: >> Hello all >> >> Apologies for the long delay since the last version of this series; the time I >> had free to work on it became somewhat restrained. > No worries, thank you for all the work you are putting into this. My pleasure > I have not taken a close look at the code yet, but I see that Andy has and > the amount of remarks which he has on patch 7/8 which is the big one seems > to be limited, so I believe that we are getting close to this being ready > for merging. > > This touches a lot of subsystems, so we need to come up with a plan to > merge this. Here is my proposal for how to do this: > > 1/8 ACPI: scan: Extend acpi_walk_dep_device_list() > 2/8 ACPI: scan: Add function to fetch dependent of acpi device > 3/8 i2c: core: Add a format macro for I2C device names > 4/8 gpiolib: acpi: Export acpi_get_gpiod() > 5/8 clkdev: Make clkdev_drop() null aware > 6/8 gpiolib: acpi: Add acpi_gpio_get_io_resource() > 7/8 platform/x86: Add intel_skl_int3472 driver > 8/8 mfd: tps68470: Remove tps68470 MFD driver > > Rafael already indicated that he wants to merge 1/8 (and presumably also 2/8) > through his tree and that he will provide an immutable branch with those > for merging into the pdx86 tree. I'll send a v5 with the renames asap, might try and do the other changes and send the whole series, depends how much time I get to work on it over the next few days... > 4/8 and 6/8 are both gpiolib-acpi patches and seem to be ready for merging > now, perhaps the gpiolib-acpi maintainers can already merge these and also > provide an immutable branch ? Andy/Mika ? So, Andy, you'd prefer I re-order these so they're consecutive...did I understand that right? > 3/8 and 5/8 seem to be nice cleanups, but not really necessary. IMHO it > would be best to park these cleanups for later and for 3/8 add the following > where necessary for now: > > /* FIXME drop this once the I2C_DEV_NAME_FORMAT macro has been added to include/linux/i2c.h */ > #ifndef I2C_DEV_NAME_FORMAT > #define I2C_DEV_NAME_FORMAT "i2c-%s" > #endif > > This is not the prettiest but it reduces all the subsys cross-deps and things > like this have been done before for similar reasons. > > Likewise it would be good if you can add if (foo) as condition before any > clkdev_drop(foo) calls in this patch-set and then merge > 5/8 "clkdev: Make clkdev_drop() null aware" independently of this and then > once both are in Linux tree follow-up with a cleanup patch dropping the if (foo) > guards. This is fine by me if people are happy for it to go in like that; I'll just fix it up later. > So this would leave as deps for 7/8 just the 2 ACPI and 2 gpiolib-acpi patches > which I can hopefully pull-in via immutable branches and then we are good. > > AFAICT patch 8/8 can be merged independently once 7/8 hits for-next (IOW once > we are sure the next kernel will have 7/8). > > > > Or alternatively one of the involved subsys maintainers just merges the entire > set (once it is ready) and then provides an immutable branch with the entire set > on top of 5.13-rc1 (or 5.14-rc1). But that requires acks from all the other > subsys maintainers. Note I'm fine with either approach.
On Wed, May 26, 2021 at 12:03:23AM +0100, Daniel Scally wrote: > On 25/05/2021 14:10, Hans de Goede wrote: > > On 5/20/21 4:09 PM, Daniel Scally wrote: ... > > 4/8 and 6/8 are both gpiolib-acpi patches and seem to be ready for merging > > now, perhaps the gpiolib-acpi maintainers can already merge these and also > > provide an immutable branch ? Andy/Mika ? > > > So, Andy, you'd prefer I re-order these so they're consecutive...did I > understand that right? Yes.
Hi, On 5/26/21 1:03 AM, Daniel Scally wrote: <snip> >> 3/8 and 5/8 seem to be nice cleanups, but not really necessary. IMHO it >> would be best to park these cleanups for later and for 3/8 add the following >> where necessary for now: >> >> /* FIXME drop this once the I2C_DEV_NAME_FORMAT macro has been added to include/linux/i2c.h */ >> #ifndef I2C_DEV_NAME_FORMAT >> #define I2C_DEV_NAME_FORMAT "i2c-%s" >> #endif >> >> This is not the prettiest but it reduces all the subsys cross-deps and things >> like this have been done before for similar reasons. >> >> Likewise it would be good if you can add if (foo) as condition before any >> clkdev_drop(foo) calls in this patch-set and then merge >> 5/8 "clkdev: Make clkdev_drop() null aware" independently of this and then >> once both are in Linux tree follow-up with a cleanup patch dropping the if (foo) >> guards. > > > This is fine by me if people are happy for it to go in like that; I'll > just fix it up later. I don't expect anyone to object against these 2 small fixes going in later, if you can drop these 2 for v5 that would greatly help with untangling all the subsys dependencies. Then I can just merge an ACPI + a gpiolib-acpi immutable branch and then merge the big drivers/platform/x86 patch. Regards, Hans