| Message ID | 1694890416-14409-1-git-send-email-wentong.wu@intel.com |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | Add Intel LJCA device driver | expand |
On 2023-09-16 19:53, Wentong Wu wrote: > Add driver for Intel La Jolla Cove Adapter (LJCA) device. This > IO-expander adds additional functions to the host system such > as GPIO, I2C and SPI with USB host interface. We add 4 drivers > to support this device: a USB driver, a GPIO chip driver, a I2C > controller driver and a SPI controller driver. Can I be a pain and ask you to limit the rate at which you repost this series? You send it every other day, hence actively discouraging people from reviewing it (why would they, there's another version coming). Once a week is a perfectly good rate, and would probably lead to better results. Alternatively, if you decide that you really want to keep sending it that often, please drop me from the Cc list. Thanks, M.
Hi Marc, Greg, On 9/17/23 12:42, Greg KH wrote: > On Sun, Sep 17, 2023 at 02:53:32AM +0800, Wentong Wu wrote: >> Add driver for Intel La Jolla Cove Adapter (LJCA) device. This >> IO-expander adds additional functions to the host system such >> as GPIO, I2C and SPI with USB host interface. We add 4 drivers >> to support this device: a USB driver, a GPIO chip driver, a I2C >> controller driver and a SPI controller driver. >> >> --- >> v19: >> - add v17's change which v18 doesn't apply > > I don't understand this changelog line at all, what do you mean? > >> v18: >> - rebase patch set on top of Linus' master branch (57d88e8a5974644039fbc47806bac7bb12025636) > > Why? What required this? I noticed that this did not apply cleanly (the SPI patch did not apply cleanly), so I asked for the next version to be based on 6.6-rc1 or Linus' master branch. Note I did not ask for a new version to be send right away, but I'm afraid there has been a bit of miscommunication and instead of rebasing the next version based on further review Wentong has send out a new rebased version immediately, sorry about that. Regards, Hans
On 17.09.23 13:26, Hans de Goede wrote: > Note I did not ask for a new version to be send right away, but > I'm afraid there has been a bit of miscommunication and instead > of rebasing the next version based on further review Wentong has > send out a new rebased version immediately, sorry about that. Hi, what to do now? It's been ten days. I am sure this driver has been very thoroughly reviewed by now. We are dragging this out. Do we want the developer to do another release or do we ask Greg to take it as is? This is becoming almost comical, but that is not what we want driver submission to be. As far as I am concerned on the USB side everything is fine now. Hans? Greg? Regards Oliver
Hi, On 9/28/23 12:18, Oliver Neukum wrote: > On 17.09.23 13:26, Hans de Goede wrote: > >> Note I did not ask for a new version to be send right away, but >> I'm afraid there has been a bit of miscommunication and instead >> of rebasing the next version based on further review Wentong has >> send out a new rebased version immediately, sorry about that. > > Hi, > > what to do now? It's been ten days. > I am sure this driver has been very thoroughly reviewed by now. > We are dragging this out. Do we want the developer to do another release > or do we ask Greg to take it as is? > This is becoming almost comical, but that is not what we want driver > submission to be. > > As far as I am concerned on the USB side everything is fine now. > Hans? Greg? Note I have been mostly involved in testing these patches I have *not* thoroughly reviewed them. I have taken a quick(ish) look which did not find anything obviously wrong. I agree that at least patch 1/4 is ready for merging. I'm not sure if Greg should pick-up the entire series or if the rest should be merged through there relevant subsystems to also give the relevant subsys maintainer tree. For the series: Acked-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Tested-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> Regards, Hans
Hi, On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 12:18:50PM +0200, Oliver Neukum wrote: > On 17.09.23 13:26, Hans de Goede wrote: > > Note I did not ask for a new version to be send right away, but > > I'm afraid there has been a bit of miscommunication and instead > > of rebasing the next version based on further review Wentong has > > send out a new rebased version immediately, sorry about that. > > Hi, > > what to do now? It's been ten days. > I am sure this driver has been very thoroughly reviewed by now. > We are dragging this out. Do we want the developer to do another release > or do we ask Greg to take it as is? > This is becoming almost comical, but that is not what we want driver > submission to be. > > As far as I am concerned on the USB side everything is fine now. > Hans? Greg? i2c is also good to go and the rest looks good, as well. I have some concerns on patch 4 that looks like a mixture of many random things. Andi
On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 02:20:04PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > I agree that at least patch 1/4 is ready for merging. I'm > not sure if Greg should pick-up the entire series or if > the rest should be merged through there relevant subsystems > to also give the relevant subsys maintainer tree. I stopped paying attention when it was obvious that the USB stuff was struggling badly and getting lots of resends, I've not checked the SPI stuff in a while.
On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 2:29 PM Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@linux.intel.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 12:18:50PM +0200, Oliver Neukum wrote: > > On 17.09.23 13:26, Hans de Goede wrote: > > > Note I did not ask for a new version to be send right away, but > > > I'm afraid there has been a bit of miscommunication and instead > > > of rebasing the next version based on further review Wentong has > > > send out a new rebased version immediately, sorry about that. > > > > Hi, > > > > what to do now? It's been ten days. > > I am sure this driver has been very thoroughly reviewed by now. > > We are dragging this out. Do we want the developer to do another release > > or do we ask Greg to take it as is? > > This is becoming almost comical, but that is not what we want driver > > submission to be. > > > > As far as I am concerned on the USB side everything is fine now. > > Hans? Greg? > > i2c is also good to go and the rest looks good, as well. I have > some concerns on patch 4 that looks like a mixture of many random > things. > > Andi It's got a lot of coding style fixes ninja-packed in there that are not mentioned by the commit message. But as it's been reviewed by Linus, acked by Andy (and myself) and tested by Hans, I'm ready to let it slide if that saves me from seeing ten additional versions of this series in my inbox. Bart