Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <5d507fda-525e-4064-3add-0bb0cc23d016@canonical.com>
Date:   Sun, 20 Feb 2022 10:30:31 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.5.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/11] i2c: npcm: Bug fixes timeout, spurious
 interrupts
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Tyrone Ting <warp5tw@gmail.com>, avifishman70@gmail.com,
        tmaimon77@gmail.com, tali.perry1@gmail.com, venture@google.com,
        yuenn@google.com, benjaminfair@google.com, robh+dt@kernel.org,
        semen.protsenko@linaro.org, yangyicong@hisilicon.com,
        wsa@kernel.org, jie.deng@intel.com, sven@svenpeter.dev,
        bence98@sch.bme.hu, christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu,
        lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com, olof@lixom.net, arnd@arndb.de,
        digetx@gmail.com, andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com,
        tali.perry@nuvoton.com, Avi.Fishman@nuvoton.com,
        tomer.maimon@nuvoton.com, KWLIU@nuvoton.com, JJLIU0@nuvoton.com,
        kfting@nuvoton.com
Cc:     openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org,
        devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20220220035321.3870-1-warp5tw@gmail.com>
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@canonical.com>
In-Reply-To: <20220220035321.3870-1-warp5tw@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On 20/02/2022 04:53, Tyrone Ting wrote:
> From: Tyrone Ting <kfting@nuvoton.com>
> 
> This patchset includes the following fixes:
> 
> - Add dt-bindings description for NPCM845.
> - Bug fix for timeout calculation.
> - Better handling of spurious interrupts.
> - Fix for event type in slave mode.
> - Removal of own slave addresses [2:10].
> - Support for next gen BMC (NPCM845).
> 
> The NPCM I2C driver is tested on NPCM750 and NPCM845 evaluation boards.
> 
> Addressed comments from:
>  - Jonathan Neuschäfer : https://lkml.org/lkml/2022/2/7/670
>  - Krzysztof Kozlowski : https://lkml.org/lkml/2022/2/7/760

How did you address the ABI change comment? I still see you break the
ABI with the introduction of a new, required property.


Best regards,
Krzysztof