[PATCH 2/2] i2c: aspeed: cleanup driver
brendanhiggins at google.com
Wed Aug 31 08:24:47 AEST 2016
>> Did you send a new version?
Yeah, the subject is: [PATCH v2] i2c: aspeed: added driver for Aspeed I2C
I sent it --in-reply-to=<your previous message ID>, does it not show as a
child of the thread in your email client?
Sorry if changing the commit message title screwed things up for you, but I
felt that the clean up title was no longer fitting.
On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 3:15 PM Joel Stanley <joel at jms.id.au> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 7:14 AM, Brendan Higgins
> <brendanhiggins at google.com> wrote:
> > Oh, and one more note: I moved out the eeprom quirk patch from this patch
> > set because I think it makes sense as a different submission upstream.
> That makes sense to me.
> > On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 11:59 AM Brendan Higgins <
> brendanhiggins at google.com>
> > wrote:
> >> checkpatch seems to be upset about my device tree identifiers being
> >> undocumented; do we have a coordinated effort for this? I did not even
> see a
> >> directory for aspeed under arm.
> As this is a driver, the binding should be added in
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i2c/. Use one of the recently added
> existing drivers as a template. Add the binding in a separate commit,
> coming before the addition of the driver. When you send it upstream
> you will cc the device tree maintainers, who will ack your bindings.
> The driver maintainer will then merge the two patches into their tree.
> >> checkpatch is also asked about updating MAINTAINERS, but looks like it
> >> should be covered under existing line:
> >> F: drivers/*/*aspeed*
> >> Does it just ask this every time you add a file?
> Yeah, I think it just complains for the sake of it.
> >> changelog:
> >> - Squashed driver commits as suggested by Joel
> >> - Renamed a couple functions for consistency
> >> - Fixed a couple style errors
> Did you send a new version?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the openbmc