Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752964AbbDFQ2R (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Apr 2015 12:28:17 -0400 Received: from mail-la0-f43.google.com ([209.85.215.43]:33223 "EHLO mail-la0-f43.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751945AbbDFQ2O (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Apr 2015 12:28:14 -0400 From: "Grygorii.Strashko@linaro.org" X-Google-Original-From: "Grygorii.Strashko@linaro.org" Message-ID: <5522B41C.40107@linaro.org> Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2015 19:28:12 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Wolfram Sang CC: Kevin Hilman , Santosh Shilimkar , Sekhar Nori , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Murali Karicheri , Alexander Sverdlin , linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, =?windows-1252?Q?Uwe_Kleine-K=F6nig?= , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Alexander Sverdlin Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/5] i2c: davinci: use bus recovery infrastructure References: <1417448047-15236-1-git-send-email-grygorii.strashko@ti.com> <1417448047-15236-5-git-send-email-grygorii.strashko@ti.com> <20150318203151.GA12072@katana> <550C67D6.3080909@linaro.org> <20150403201846.GH2016@katana> <55228613.2060607@linaro.org> <20150406160930.GA937@katana> In-Reply-To: <20150406160930.GA937@katana> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1264 Lines: 35 On 04/06/2015 07:09 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote: > >>>> Of course, i2c_davinci_wait_bus_not_busy() has to be fixed first >>>> as proposed by Alexander Sverdlin here: >>>> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/448994/. >>> >>> Okay, good that you said it. So I'll give his patch series priority over >>> this one. >> >> >> Sorry, but this series already mises few merge windows and it has a lot >> of revied-by and tested-by, so could we proceed please? >> >> Re-based & re-sent http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg410810.html > > ??? Didn't you say above that Alexaders's patch is needed first? > Sorry for misunderstanding. I said that if We'd like to continue and optimize more recovery path then yes - Alexaders's patch will be needed (patch 2 from his series [PATCH 2/3] i2c: davinci: Refactor i2c_davinci_wait_bus_not_busy(), which, in turn need to be rebased as the first one in his series and re-send). And in my opinion all such improvements could be done by subsequent patches. -- regards, -grygorii -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/