lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Dec]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/3] usb: phy-generic: Add GPIO based ChipSelect
Hi,

On Mon, Dec 09, 2013 at 09:45:30AM +0800, Chris Ruehl wrote:
> On Saturday, December 07, 2013 04:24 AM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 03:05:17PM +0800, Chris Ruehl wrote:
> >>@@ -231,27 +249,40 @@ static int usb_phy_gen_xceiv_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >> return -ENOMEM;
> >>
> >> nop->reset_active_low = true; /* default behaviour */
> >>+ nop->cs_active_low = true;
> >>
> >> if (dev->of_node) {
> >> struct device_node *node = dev->of_node;
> >> enum of_gpio_flags flags;
> >>+ enum of_gpio_flags csflags;
> >>
> >> if (of_property_read_u32(node, "clock-frequency",&clk_rate))
> >> clk_rate = 0;
> >>
> >> needs_vcc = of_property_read_bool(node, "vcc-supply");
> >>+
> >> nop->gpio_reset = of_get_named_gpio_flags(node, "reset-gpios",
> >> 0,&flags);
> >>+
> >
> >two unrelated changes
> >
> >> if (nop->gpio_reset == -EPROBE_DEFER)
> >> return -EPROBE_DEFER;
> >>
> >> nop->reset_active_low = flags& OF_GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW;
> >>
> >>+ nop->gpio_chipselect = of_get_named_gpio_flags(node, "cs-gpios",
> >>+ 0,&csflags);
> >>+ if (gpio_is_valid(nop->gpio_chipselect))
> >>+ nop->cs_active_low = csflags& OF_GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW;
> >>+
> >> } else if (pdata) {
> >> type = pdata->type;
> >> clk_rate = pdata->clk_rate;
> >> needs_vcc = pdata->needs_vcc;
> >> nop->gpio_reset = pdata->gpio_reset;
> >>+ nop->gpio_chipselect = pdata->gpio_chipselect;
> >>+ } else {
> >>+ nop->gpio_reset = -1;
> >
> >This line is already going upstream, please remove it, i'll handle the
> >conflict later.
> >
>
> Beause the rest of the patch set is not ready to make it in the
> upstream, I will checkout latest linux-next and send the patch again
> as a single patch.

no, please *never* base any patches off of linux-next. That tree gets
recreated every day and can never be considered stable. Aim at using a
tag from Linus instead (v3.13-rc3, for example). It's a much better
development point than linux-next.

In case patch doesn't apply cleanly, different maintainers will have
their choice of rebasing it themselves or asking author to rebase on a
specific branch.

By default, however, use a tag from Linus.

cheers

--
balbi
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-12-09 05:21    [W:0.081 / U:0.096 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site