[PATCH 1/3] i2c-mv64xxx: Add I2C Transaction Generator support

[Jason Cooper]

On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 05:43:23PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 04:30:02PM +0100, Gregory CLEMENT wrote:
> > On 07/08/2013 17:57, Jason Cooper wrote:
> > > On Wed, Aug 07, 2013 at 04:35:46PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> But we shouldn't use it alone: we should always use:
> > >>> compatible = "marvell,mv78230-i2c", "marvell,mv64xxx-i2c";
> > >>>
> > >>> From my point of view using  "marvell,mv78230-i2c" alone is an error.
> > >>>
> > >>> Wolfram what is your opinion on it?
> > >>
> > >> It is not strictly an error, but risky. If you use an older Kernel
> > >> version (or other OS) which only offers "mv64xxx" you will have no
> > >> match. Although the driver theoretically could have basic support for
> > >> all mv64xxx variants skipping all additional features of later IP
> > >> revisions.
> > > 
> > > I agree here.  The driver is advertising what IP blocks it can handle,
> > > so it makes sense to add both strings since it can handle both.
> > 
> > Wolfram,
> > so beside remarks about the compatibility strings. I didn't any other
> > comment since the v3 which was 7 weeks ago.
> > 
> > Does it mean that once I will have added the handle of this string,
> > you will be able to take the series for the 3.12 kernel?
> 
> Please could you also ensure the new string is documented in
> Documentation/devicetree, with a brief description of what it implies
> about the hardware beyond the exiting "marvell,mv64xxx-i2c" string.

That was in patch 3/3:

  ARM: dts: mvebu: Introduce a new compatible string for mv64xxx-i2c

Which I've applied here:

  http://git.infradead.org/linux-mvebu.git/commitdiff/e7c4a1e9f937453a32a5119868cac49de098640a

And my reasoning for taking it:

  http://marc.info/?l=linux-arm-kernel&m=137555145730141&w=2

I haven't sent a PR to arm-soc yet (I like to let things gel in -next
for a few days), so if there's something wrong with it, please let me
know.

thx,

Jason.