Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Thu, 25 Mar 2021 11:15:54 -0700
From:   Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
To:     Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
Cc:     Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com>, Nick Dyer <nick@shmanahar.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
        Jiada Wang <jiada_wang@mentor.com>,
        linux-input@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 3/3] ARM: tegra: acer-a500: Add atmel,wakeup-method
 property
Message-ID: <YFzTWuUZbdXvnpHC@google.com>
References: <20210302102158.10533-1-digetx@gmail.com>
 <20210302102158.10533-4-digetx@gmail.com>
 <YFfLXLDIuRdj2bWs@google.com>
 <YFyZ0ejrSxWc3JZT@orome.fritz.box>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <YFyZ0ejrSxWc3JZT@orome.fritz.box>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 03:10:25PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 21, 2021 at 03:40:28PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 02, 2021 at 01:21:58PM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> > > Acer A500 uses Atmel Maxtouch 1386 touchscreen controller. This controller
> > > has WAKE line which could be connected to I2C clock lane, dedicated GPIO
> > > or fixed to HIGH level. Controller wakes up from a deep sleep when WAKE
> > > line is asserted low. Acer A500 has WAKE line connected to I2C clock and
> > > Linux device driver doesn't work property without knowing what wakeup
> > > method is used by h/w.
> > > 
> > > Add atmel,wakeup-method property to the touchscreen node.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@gmail.com>
> > 
> > Applied, thank you.
> 
> I noticed that you had applied this as I was applying a different patch
> that touches the same area and it causes a conflict. In general I prefer
> to pick up all device tree changes into the Tegra tree, specifically to
> avoid such conflicts.
> 
> That said, I didn't see an email from Stephen about this causing a
> conflict in linux-next, so perhaps it's fine. If this pops up again it
> might be worth considering to drop this from your tree so that I can
> resolve the conflict in the Tegra tree.

Sorry about that, I went ahead and dropped the patch from my branch.

Thanks.

-- 
Dmitry