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:   Mon, 7 Jun 2021 08:08:27 +0200
From:   Uwe =?utf-8?Q?Kleine-K=C3=B6nig?= <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
To:     Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>
Cc:     Clemens Gruber <clemens.gruber@pqgruber.com>,
        Sven Van Asbroeck <TheSven73@gmail.com>,
        linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        kernel@pengutronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] pwm: core: Support new usage_power setting in PWM
 state
Message-ID: <20210607060827.vxdihsfqtw3otyco@pengutronix.de>
References: <20210507131845.37605-1-clemens.gruber@pqgruber.com>
 <20210507150317.bnluhqrqepde4xjm@pengutronix.de>
 <YJVhLrkeNXBp6M1p@workstation.tuxnet>
 <20210507231831.zmvyspcq7xhm25y4@pengutronix.de>
 <YLUK8GXHaBYyVe1R@workstation.tuxnet>
 <YLn3MZ+6HJM/UrRT@orome.fritz.box>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
        protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="lpegus2nl7jlnljt"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <YLn3MZ+6HJM/UrRT@orome.fritz.box>
Precedence: bulk


--lpegus2nl7jlnljt
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello Thierry,

On Fri, Jun 04, 2021 at 11:49:37AM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
> In the interest of making forward progress, I've applied this series.

I proposed a different approach that in contrast to usage_power:

 - is well defined
   (so driver authors and consumers know what to provide or expect resp.);
 - has good name people understand without reading documentation;
 - fully covers the problem Clemens want to address;
 - fully covers what the only implementing lowlevel driver does; and
 - is easy to implement based on the patches in this series

This is not what I call "forward progress". I take it personal that
after I pointed out technical shortcomings with this patch set and even
suggested a better concept, you didn't even made the effort to argue
but instead simply went on applying the patches.

Can you please point out what I'm missing?

Best regards
Uwe

--=20
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Uwe Kleine-K=F6nig            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |

--lpegus2nl7jlnljt
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAABCgAdFiEEfnIqFpAYrP8+dKQLwfwUeK3K7AkFAmC9t9gACgkQwfwUeK3K
7AlykAf9E4vG8VzTUHHapQAZpZPmeJORzF/1HR538KgmDa2z7gXgUnTj+/NUt5lx
MZupuybXwOg1D/grpFsUe/BhP40VmxO2B2jL9uPpYkl2PVQnC+0Nsg43RI1grtej
0T/Wl7QLxcCHcZMFK4g7Ps+O4Wt5f30x6l/ORdpZMGyyFiNMB/lozde3Rl9vtIEl
1Ul70n0cO+aMj1u1EgPx1KsG1dIhh2LLC/SQgYFr0cfZOjuM5+oKOKokR6wEHDk7
5Fw2oA5mhHfvjs8omYYsyJgGJ04gHufYqfac73H40GXHHi75GS5le5uYtGH0OrVo
P/6r4bOaLd916u0tCqs8nwSR/CF9zw==
=qUgw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--lpegus2nl7jlnljt--