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;
From:   Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
To:     Wolfram Sang <wsa@kernel.org>,
        Chris Packham <chris.packham@alliedtelesis.co.nz>
Cc:     andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com, andy.shevchenko@gmail.com,
        robh+dt@kernel.org, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org,
        devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] P2040/P2041 i2c recovery erratum
In-Reply-To: <YK1HqE+3ILtGXZ7E@kunai>
References: <20210511212052.27242-1-chris.packham@alliedtelesis.co.nz>
 <YK1HqE+3ILtGXZ7E@kunai>
Date:   Wed, 26 May 2021 11:02:45 +1000
Message-ID: <87zgwigvd6.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Precedence: bulk

Wolfram Sang <wsa@kernel.org> writes:
> On Wed, May 12, 2021 at 09:20:48AM +1200, Chris Packham wrote:
>> The P2040/P2041 has an erratum where the i2c recovery scheme
>> documented in the reference manual (and currently implemented
>> in the i2c-mpc.c driver) does not work. The errata document
>> provides an alternative that does work. This series implements
>> that alternative and uses a property in the devicetree to
>> decide when the alternative mechanism is needed.
>
> The series looks good to me. Usually, I don't take DTS patches. This
> time I'd make an exception and apply all patches to for-current because
> this is clearly a bugfix. For that, I'd need an ack from PPC
> maintainers. Could I have those for patches 2+3?

Yep, done.

cheers