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;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210625171434.3xusxpxjprcdqa47@pengutronix.de>
 <20210705080144.zfbzkm7l3gmnh6st@pengutronix.de> <20210722060654.nudpdtemosi64nlb@pengutronix.de>
 <YPkg0wtYIoHKpTUW@kunai> <20210722081817.2tsjzof4gvldq6ka@pengutronix.de>
 <YPlfcbkxiBmB+vw1@kunai> <CAHp75VfC=s12Unw3+Cn0ag71mM5i90=Jbwj4nYwB5cPKiUTRSA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20210723091331.wl33wtcvvnejuhau@pengutronix.de> <06e799be-b7c0-5b93-8586-678a449d2239@microchip.com>
 <CAHp75VeFXJ-0ak7=a0QCtKNdFpu98W6iJ2YuR4MpNx+U4rHe2A@mail.gmail.com> <YP6rdmi31FFrBMzE@ninjato>
In-Reply-To: <YP6rdmi31FFrBMzE@ninjato>
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 26 Jul 2021 16:28:49 +0300
Message-ID: <CAHp75VeT-EX6U3+Y7dxoWWRZ7NqAEiNgPGW8YGVmWTuZKB4j+Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PULL] Add variants of devm_clk_get for prepared and enabled
 clocks enabled clocks
To:     Wolfram Sang <wsa@kernel.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>,
        Claudiu Beznea <Claudiu.Beznea@microchip.com>,
        =?UTF-8?Q?Uwe_Kleine=2DK=C3=B6nig?= 
        <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>,
        "open list:REAL TIME CLOCK (RTC) SUBSYSTEM" 
        <linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org>, linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com>,
        Alessandro Zummo <a.zummo@towertech.it>,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>,
        Nicolas Ferre <Nicolas.Ferre@microchip.com>,
        linux-spi <linux-spi@vger.kernel.org>,
        Oleksij Rempel <o.rempel@pengutronix.de>,
        Ludovic Desroches <Ludovic.Desroches@microchip.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
        Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@gmail.com>,
        Alexandru Ardelean <aardelean@deviqon.com>,
        Sascha Hauer <kernel@pengutronix.de>,
        Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>,
        linux-clk <linux-clk@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm Mailing List <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 3:33 PM Wolfram Sang <wsa@kernel.org> wrote:
>
>
> > The idea is that you will send a PR to CCF maintainers instead of
> > patches, although it's expected that patches appear in the mailing
> > list beforehand anyway.
>
> Depends a little. For me, a Rev-by from the driver maintainer is enough,
> and I'll pick them. That lowers the burden on the drivers maintainer
> side. May not work for high volumes of patches, but for I2C this works
> enough.

AFAICT in practice it's a mandatory requirement in I=C2=B2C subsys (in the
past you hadn't accepted a patch from us without a tag from the
maintainer) which makes it equal to sending PR by a maintainer. PR
makes less burden since subsys maintainer don't need to run many tools
or a tool many times to get the pile of patches.

--=20
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko