Re: [rft, PATCH v2 00/36] pinctrl: Clean up and add missed headers
On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 11:56 PM Florian Fainelli f.fainelli@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/10/2022 1:14 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
Currently the header inclusion inside the pinctrl headers seems more arbitrary than logical. This series is basically out of two parts:
- add missed headers to the pin control drivers / users
- clean up the headers of pin control subsystem
The idea is to have this series to be pulled after -rc1 by the GPIO and pin control subsystems, so all new drivers will utilize cleaned up headers of the pin control.
Please, review and comment.
Did you really need to split this on a per-driver basis as opposed to just a treewide drivers/pinctrl, drivers/media and drivers/gpiolib patch set?
36 patches seems needlessly high when 4 patches could have achieve the same outcome.
I can combine them if maintainers ask for that, nevertheless for Intel pin control and GPIO drivers, which I care more about, I would like to leave as separate changes (easy to see in history what was done).
On Wed, Oct 12, 2022 at 01:04:10PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 11:56 PM Florian Fainelli f.fainelli@gmail.com wrote:
On 10/10/2022 1:14 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
Currently the header inclusion inside the pinctrl headers seems more arbitrary than logical. This series is basically out of two parts:
- add missed headers to the pin control drivers / users
- clean up the headers of pin control subsystem
The idea is to have this series to be pulled after -rc1 by the GPIO and pin control subsystems, so all new drivers will utilize cleaned up headers of the pin control.
Please, review and comment.
Did you really need to split this on a per-driver basis as opposed to just a treewide drivers/pinctrl, drivers/media and drivers/gpiolib patch set?
36 patches seems needlessly high when 4 patches could have achieve the same outcome.
I can combine them if maintainers ask for that, nevertheless for Intel pin control and GPIO drivers, which I care more about, I would like to leave as separate changes (easy to see in history what was done).
I can now tell why I don't like to combine. While doing a revert (it's not related to GPIO nor to pin control), it appears that I reverted extra bits as merge conflict resolution. This is per se is not an issue, but when I tried to find and reapply that missed piece I can't, because the patch is combined and Git simply ignores to have `git cherry-pick _something in the past_` done.
But again, up to maintainers.
participants (2)
-
Andy Shevchenko -
Andy Shevchenko