Hello Greg, Linus,
Greg, I didn't get your feedback on v10 of the i3c patchset [1] where I
was asking if you'd agree to have this framework merged in 4.20 (I know
you were busy with the 4.19 release and after that the Kernel Summit, so
that's not a surprise), so I'm sending this PR. It's really not an attempt
to bypass you, more like a ping that, if positively acknowledged, might
lead to inclusion of the I3C framework in 4.20 (5.0?) :-).
Please let me know if you're opposed to the idea.
Regards,
Boris
[1]https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/10/26/552
The following changes since commit 5b394b2ddf0347bef56e50c69a58773c94343ff3:
Linux 4.19-rc1 (2018-08-26 14:11:59 -0700)
are available in the Git repository at:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/i3c/linux.git tags/i3c/for-4.20
for you to fetch changes up to 71e60757e1eab6f7b821585948317961ccdc61d1:
dt-bindings: i3c: Document Cadence I3C master bindings (2018-11-01 06:12:05 +0100)
----------------------------------------------------------------
Add the I3C framework + an I3C controller driver for Cadence IP
----------------------------------------------------------------
Boris Brezillon (7):
i3c: Add core I3C infrastructure
docs: driver-api: Add I3C documentation
i3c: Add sysfs ABI spec
dt-bindings: i3c: Document core bindings
MAINTAINERS: Add myself as the I3C subsystem maintainer
i3c: master: Add driver for Cadence IP
dt-bindings: i3c: Document Cadence I3C master bindings
Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-bus-i3c | 146 ++
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i3c/cdns,i3c-master.txt | 44 +
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i3c/i3c.txt | 139 ++
Documentation/driver-api/i3c/device-driver-api.rst | 9 +
Documentation/driver-api/i3c/index.rst | 11 +
Documentation/driver-api/i3c/master-driver-api.rst | 10 +
Documentation/driver-api/i3c/protocol.rst | 203 +++
Documentation/driver-api/index.rst | 1 +
MAINTAINERS | 12 +
drivers/Kconfig | 2 +
drivers/Makefile | 2 +-
drivers/i3c/Kconfig | 24 +
drivers/i3c/Makefile | 4 +
drivers/i3c/device.c | 233 ++++
drivers/i3c/internals.h | 26 +
drivers/i3c/master.c | 2661 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
drivers/i3c/master/Kconfig | 6 +
drivers/i3c/master/Makefile | 1 +
drivers/i3c/master/i3c-master-cdns.c | 1671 +++++++++++++++++++++++
include/linux/i3c/ccc.h | 385 ++++++
include/linux/i3c/device.h | 331 +++++
include/linux/i3c/master.h | 648 +++++++++
include/linux/mod_devicetable.h | 17 +
23 files changed, 6585 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
create mode 100644 Documentation/ABI/testing/sysfs-bus-i3c
create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i3c/cdns,i3c-master.txt
create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/i3c/i3c.txt
create mode 100644 Documentation/driver-api/i3c/device-driver-api.rst
create mode 100644 Documentation/driver-api/i3c/index.rst
create mode 100644 Documentation/driver-api/i3c/master-driver-api.rst
create mode 100644 Documentation/driver-api/i3c/protocol.rst
create mode 100644 drivers/i3c/Kconfig
create mode 100644 drivers/i3c/Makefile
create mode 100644 drivers/i3c/device.c
create mode 100644 drivers/i3c/internals.h
create mode 100644 drivers/i3c/master.c
create mode 100644 drivers/i3c/master/Kconfig
create mode 100644 drivers/i3c/master/Makefile
create mode 100644 drivers/i3c/master/i3c-master-cdns.c
create mode 100644 include/linux/i3c/ccc.h
create mode 100644 include/linux/i3c/device.h
create mode 100644 include/linux/i3c/master.h
On Thu, Nov 01, 2018 at 06:35:23AM +0100, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> Hello Greg, Linus,
>
> Greg, I didn't get your feedback on v10 of the i3c patchset [1] where I
> was asking if you'd agree to have this framework merged in 4.20 (I know
> you were busy with the 4.19 release and after that the Kernel Summit, so
> that's not a surprise), so I'm sending this PR. It's really not an attempt
> to bypass you, more like a ping that, if positively acknowledged, might
> lead to inclusion of the I3C framework in 4.20 (5.0?) :-).
>
> Please let me know if you're opposed to the idea.
>
> Regards,
>
> Boris
>
> [1]https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/10/26/552
The last set of patches was sent way too late for this -rc cycle so I
was going to review them again once 4.20-rc1 was out.
Also you do not have an ack from the DT maintainers yet, which would be
required as well, right?
So I don't think this can be merged just yet, sorry.
greg k-h
Hello Greg,
On Thu, 1 Nov 2018 12:33:30 +0100
Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 01, 2018 at 06:35:23AM +0100, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> > Hello Greg, Linus,
> >
> > Greg, I didn't get your feedback on v10 of the i3c patchset [1] where I
> > was asking if you'd agree to have this framework merged in 4.20 (I know
> > you were busy with the 4.19 release and after that the Kernel Summit, so
> > that's not a surprise), so I'm sending this PR. It's really not an attempt
> > to bypass you, more like a ping that, if positively acknowledged, might
> > lead to inclusion of the I3C framework in 4.20 (5.0?) :-).
> >
> > Please let me know if you're opposed to the idea.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Boris
> >
> > [1]https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/10/26/552
>
> The last set of patches was sent way too late for this -rc cycle so I
> was going to review them again once 4.20-rc1 was out.
>
> Also you do not have an ack from the DT maintainers yet, which would be
> required as well, right?
I had a R-b from Rob on Tuesday.
>
> So I don't think this can be merged just yet, sorry.
Okay, then I'm waiting for your review.
Thanks,
Boris
On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 10:35 PM Boris Brezillon
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Greg, I didn't get your feedback on v10 of the i3c patchset [1] where I
> was asking if you'd agree to have this framework merged in 4.20 (I know
> you were busy with the 4.19 release and after that the Kernel Summit, so
> that's not a surprise), so I'm sending this PR. It's really not an attempt
> to bypass you, more like a ping that, if positively acknowledged, might
> lead to inclusion of the I3C framework in 4.20 (5.0?) :-).
Regardless of any other issues, this is now too late in the merge
window for me to accept.
Yes, the merge window is two weeks, but that's not because people
should send me pull requests for two weeks. A large part of it is that
it takes time to merge stuff, and I want to have time in the later
part of the merge window for things I have to look at and ponder.
So that's why I want new stuff to be ready *before* the merge window,
and I want to see the actual pull requests early. The two weeks is not
for development and to let people delay things a bit, it's to make it
possible to synchronize and to work out issues.
Linus
Hello Linus,
On Thu, 1 Nov 2018 09:27:20 -0700
Linus Torvalds <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 10:35 PM Boris Brezillon
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Greg, I didn't get your feedback on v10 of the i3c patchset [1] where I
> > was asking if you'd agree to have this framework merged in 4.20 (I know
> > you were busy with the 4.19 release and after that the Kernel Summit, so
> > that's not a surprise), so I'm sending this PR. It's really not an attempt
> > to bypass you, more like a ping that, if positively acknowledged, might
> > lead to inclusion of the I3C framework in 4.20 (5.0?) :-).
>
> Regardless of any other issues, this is now too late in the merge
> window for me to accept.
>
> Yes, the merge window is two weeks, but that's not because people
> should send me pull requests for two weeks. A large part of it is that
> it takes time to merge stuff, and I want to have time in the later
> part of the merge window for things I have to look at and ponder.
Ok, I didn't know that.
>
> So that's why I want new stuff to be ready *before* the merge window,
> and I want to see the actual pull requests early. The two weeks is not
> for development and to let people delay things a bit, it's to make it
> possible to synchronize and to work out issues.
Noted, and sorry for the inconvenience.
Regards,
Boris