| Message ID | 20230731073613.10394-5-clamor95@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Commit | 0fe4f414c7c8ff8559206b0b6d7724cacb6f2463 |
| Headers | show |
| Series | None | expand |
Hi Svyatoslav, On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 10:36:13AM +0300, Svyatoslav Ryhel wrote: > After adding support for passing temperature data from thermal sensor > to MAX17040 it got dependency on CONFIG_IIO. From all defconfigs > using MAX17040 only s5pv210_defconfig did not have IIO already enabled > so let's enable it to avoid regression. > > Signed-off-by: Svyatoslav Ryhel <clamor95@gmail.com> > --- > arch/arm/configs/s5pv210_defconfig | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/configs/s5pv210_defconfig b/arch/arm/configs/s5pv210_defconfig > index 4c1e480b5bbd..24070ee3d43e 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/configs/s5pv210_defconfig > +++ b/arch/arm/configs/s5pv210_defconfig > @@ -97,6 +97,7 @@ CONFIG_MMC_SDHCI_S3C_DMA=y > CONFIG_RTC_CLASS=y > CONFIG_RTC_DRV_MAX8998=m > CONFIG_DMADEVICES=y > +CONFIG_IIO=y > CONFIG_PWM=y > CONFIG_PWM_SAMSUNG=y > CONFIG_PHY_SAMSUNG_USB2=m Should this patch be squashed to the previous patch? I think you break bisectability for this board if you enable iio only here. Andi
Hi, On Sun, Aug 06, 2023 at 10:29:04AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 06/08/2023 00:42, Andi Shyti wrote: > > Hi Svyatoslav, > > > > On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 10:36:13AM +0300, Svyatoslav Ryhel wrote: > >> After adding support for passing temperature data from thermal sensor > >> to MAX17040 it got dependency on CONFIG_IIO. From all defconfigs > >> using MAX17040 only s5pv210_defconfig did not have IIO already enabled > >> so let's enable it to avoid regression. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Svyatoslav Ryhel <clamor95@gmail.com> > >> --- > >> arch/arm/configs/s5pv210_defconfig | 1 + > >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > >> > >> diff --git a/arch/arm/configs/s5pv210_defconfig b/arch/arm/configs/s5pv210_defconfig > >> index 4c1e480b5bbd..24070ee3d43e 100644 > >> --- a/arch/arm/configs/s5pv210_defconfig > >> +++ b/arch/arm/configs/s5pv210_defconfig > >> @@ -97,6 +97,7 @@ CONFIG_MMC_SDHCI_S3C_DMA=y > >> CONFIG_RTC_CLASS=y > >> CONFIG_RTC_DRV_MAX8998=m > >> CONFIG_DMADEVICES=y > >> +CONFIG_IIO=y > >> CONFIG_PWM=y > >> CONFIG_PWM_SAMSUNG=y > >> CONFIG_PHY_SAMSUNG_USB2=m > > > > Should this patch be squashed to the previous patch? I think you > > break bisectability for this board if you enable iio only here. > > The defconfig change matters less - distros don't use them - so this > points to the fact that patchset affected the users. All existing users > of max17040 drivers, who do not enable IIO, will have their setups broken. That's why I'm suggesting to squash this patch with the previous. Anyway, up to you... except of this note everything looks fine in the series. Andi
On 07/08/2023 10:55, Andi Shyti wrote: > Hi, > > On Sun, Aug 06, 2023 at 10:29:04AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> On 06/08/2023 00:42, Andi Shyti wrote: >>> Hi Svyatoslav, >>> >>> On Mon, Jul 31, 2023 at 10:36:13AM +0300, Svyatoslav Ryhel wrote: >>>> After adding support for passing temperature data from thermal sensor >>>> to MAX17040 it got dependency on CONFIG_IIO. From all defconfigs >>>> using MAX17040 only s5pv210_defconfig did not have IIO already enabled >>>> so let's enable it to avoid regression. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Svyatoslav Ryhel <clamor95@gmail.com> >>>> --- >>>> arch/arm/configs/s5pv210_defconfig | 1 + >>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/configs/s5pv210_defconfig b/arch/arm/configs/s5pv210_defconfig >>>> index 4c1e480b5bbd..24070ee3d43e 100644 >>>> --- a/arch/arm/configs/s5pv210_defconfig >>>> +++ b/arch/arm/configs/s5pv210_defconfig >>>> @@ -97,6 +97,7 @@ CONFIG_MMC_SDHCI_S3C_DMA=y >>>> CONFIG_RTC_CLASS=y >>>> CONFIG_RTC_DRV_MAX8998=m >>>> CONFIG_DMADEVICES=y >>>> +CONFIG_IIO=y >>>> CONFIG_PWM=y >>>> CONFIG_PWM_SAMSUNG=y >>>> CONFIG_PHY_SAMSUNG_USB2=m >>> >>> Should this patch be squashed to the previous patch? I think you >>> break bisectability for this board if you enable iio only here. >> >> The defconfig change matters less - distros don't use them - so this >> points to the fact that patchset affected the users. All existing users >> of max17040 drivers, who do not enable IIO, will have their setups broken. > > That's why I'm suggesting to squash this patch with the previous. It would not solve much. All existing users will be still broken. > > Anyway, up to you... except of this note everything looks fine in > the series. I would actually prefer not to depend on IIO, but this would require stubs for missing IIO functions. Best regards, Krzysztof
On Mon, 31 Jul 2023 10:36:13 +0300, Svyatoslav Ryhel wrote: > After adding support for passing temperature data from thermal sensor > to MAX17040 it got dependency on CONFIG_IIO. From all defconfigs > using MAX17040 only s5pv210_defconfig did not have IIO already enabled > so let's enable it to avoid regression. > > Applied, thanks! [4/4] ARM: configs: s5pv210_defconfig: enable IIO required by MAX17040 https://git.kernel.org/krzk/linux/c/dc836afd2be7618d8c849fd93bd3e15513289b70 Best regards,
diff --git a/arch/arm/configs/s5pv210_defconfig b/arch/arm/configs/s5pv210_defconfig index 4c1e480b5bbd..24070ee3d43e 100644 --- a/arch/arm/configs/s5pv210_defconfig +++ b/arch/arm/configs/s5pv210_defconfig @@ -97,6 +97,7 @@ CONFIG_MMC_SDHCI_S3C_DMA=y CONFIG_RTC_CLASS=y CONFIG_RTC_DRV_MAX8998=m CONFIG_DMADEVICES=y +CONFIG_IIO=y CONFIG_PWM=y CONFIG_PWM_SAMSUNG=y CONFIG_PHY_SAMSUNG_USB2=m
After adding support for passing temperature data from thermal sensor to MAX17040 it got dependency on CONFIG_IIO. From all defconfigs using MAX17040 only s5pv210_defconfig did not have IIO already enabled so let's enable it to avoid regression. Signed-off-by: Svyatoslav Ryhel <clamor95@gmail.com> --- arch/arm/configs/s5pv210_defconfig | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)