[rtc-linux] Re: [PATCH v4 00/10] rtc: max77686: Extend driver and add max77802 support

[Alexandre Belloni]

On 31/01/2016 at 21:11:00 +0900, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote :
> W dniu 31.01.2016 o 21:05, Alexandre Belloni pisze:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On 27/01/2016 at 00:36:36 -0300, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote :
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> On a recent disussion [0] with Krzysztof Kozlowski and Laxman Dewangan,
> >> we came to the conclusion that the max77686 and max77802 RTC are almost
> >> the same with only a few differences so there shouldn't be two separate
> >> drivers and is better to extend max77686 driver and delete rtc-max77802.
> >>
> >> By making the driver more generic, other RTC IP blocks from Maxim PMICs
> >> could be supported as well like the max77620.
> >>
> >> This is a v4 of a series that do this, that address issues pointed out
> >> in the latest version. The v1, v2 and v3 can be found at [1], [2], [3].
> >>
> >> I've tested this patch-set on an Exynos5800 Peach Pi Chromebook that has
> >> a max77802 PMIC and the RTC was working correctly. Krzysztof Kozlowski
> >> tested v3 on an max77686 but this version only has cosmetic changes so
> >> it should not cause any functionality changes.
> >>
> >> [0]: http://www.spinics.net/lists/devicetree/msg110348.html
> >> [1]: https://lwn.net/Articles/672568/
> >> [2]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/1/25/767
> >> [3]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/1/26/787
> >>
> > 
> > I've applied patches 1 to 8 and I'll discussed with Arnd and Olof about
> > what I should do with the defconfig changes.
> 
> To avoid conflicts they could go through samsung-soc tree. I could pick
> them if you provide me a tag with rest of patchset (dependencies).
> 
> Would that be okay for you?
> 

Let's do that, I've prepared a tag, rtc-max77686-4.6 with all the
max77686 material collected until now.  If I need to rebase rtc-next,
I'll rebase on top of that.


-- 
Alexandre Belloni, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com