On Tue, 17 Nov 2020, Matthias Brugger wrote: > > > On 17/11/2020 13:37, Lee Jones wrote: > > On Tue, 17 Nov 2020, Matthias Brugger wrote: > > > > > Hi Lee, > > > > > > On 13/11/2020 11:19, Lee Jones wrote: > > > > On Tue, 10 Nov 2020, Enric Balletbo i Serra wrote: > > > > > > > > > This adds syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle_optional() function to get > > > > > an > > > > > optional regmap. > > > > > > > > > > It behaves the same as syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle() except where > > > > > there is no regmap phandle. In this case, instead of returning > > > > > -ENODEV, > > > > > the function returns NULL. This makes error checking simpler when the > > > > > regmap phandle is optional. > > > > > > > > > > Suggested-by: Nicolas Boichat <drink...@chromium.org> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Enric Balletbo i Serra <enric.balle...@collabora.com> > > > > > Reviewed-by: Matthias Brugger <matthias....@gmail.com> > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > Changes in v2: > > > > > - Add Matthias r-b tag. > > > > > - Add the explanation from the patch description to the code. > > > > > - Return NULL instead of -ENOTSUPP when regmap helpers are not > > > > > enabled. > > > > > > > > > > drivers/mfd/syscon.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ > > > > > include/linux/mfd/syscon.h | 11 +++++++++++ > > > > > 2 files changed, 29 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > Applied, thanks. > > > > > > > > > > I've a series [1] that's based on this patch, could you provide a stable > > > branch for it, so that I can take the series. > > > > Why can't you base it off of for-mfd-next? > > > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/lee/mfd.git/log/?h=for-mfd-next > > > > I can do that, if you are willing to not overwrite the commit history. In my > case it can happen that I drop a patch from my for-next branch as I realize > that it e.g. breaks something. I think that's the reason why normally a > stable branch get's created, as the commit ID won't change although you > change the commit history of your for-mfd-next branch. > > If you want to go the route for me rebasing my tree on top of for-mfd-next > then I'd like to have at least a stable tag, so that it will be easier to > provide the pull-request later on. Would that be a compromise?
I don't usually provide immutable branches/tags unless I'm sharing topic branches for other maintainers to pick-up, in order to avoid merge conflicts. It's highly irregular (in fact this is a first for me) for a contributor to request one to base their work on top of. -- Lee Jones [李琼斯] Senior Technical Lead - Developer Services Linaro.org │ Open source software for Arm SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
