Return-path: Received: from www.linutronix.de ([62.245.132.108]:44810 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751220Ab2GZNv2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Jul 2012 09:51:28 -0400 Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 15:51:14 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Andres Salomon cc: Andrew Morton , Paul Fox , Daniel Drake , "Richard A. Smith" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, libertas-dev@lists.infradead.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , x86@kernel.org, Dan Williams , "John W. Linville" , Matthew Garrett , Anton Vorontsov , David Woodhouse , Chris Ball , Jon Nettleton , Greg Kroah-Hartman Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND 0/9] OLPC: create a generic OLPC EC driver In-Reply-To: <20120718213713.232e4161@dev.queued.net> Message-ID: (sfid-20120726_155144_374124_4DB2837C) References: <20120718213713.232e4161@dev.queued.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, 18 Jul 2012, Andres Salomon wrote: > The OLPC EC (Embedded Controller) code that is currently upstream is > x86-only, originally written for the XO-1. Since then, we've had the > XO-1.5 (also x86), and XO-1.75 (arm-based) enter mass production. The > 1.75 uses a vastly different EC protocol, and future hardware revisions > are likely to change it even further. > > However, the drivers do share quite a bit of code, so it makes sense to > have a platform-agnostic driver that calls into platform-specific hooks > for each XO's EC driver. This is the first stab and creating such a > beast (with further patches pending). Aside from the lack of code > duplication, this is helpful for fixing bugs in one place (for example, > we fixed an EC suspend/resume bug in 1.75 that I've just seen happen on > 1.5 without these patches. With these patches, the problem goes away). > > These patches are against Linus's current HEAD; let me know if they > don't apply somewhere, and I'll happily redo them against the -next > tree. I'm assuming that these changes (which touch places like x86, > wireless, and staging) should go through either the x86 tree, or > through akpm's tree. > > Alternatively, if the reviews are positive and I can get SOBs from the > relevant maintainers, I can set up a platform-olpc tree somewhere and > request a pull from Linus. Either via akpm or a separate tree are fine with me. Reviewed-by: Thomas Gleixner