> Subject: [PATCH V2 0/7] i2c-imx-lpi2c: add IPG clock

+ Wolfram Sang I2C maintainer.

Krzysztof,

Do you have time to give a look whether this patchset is ok for you?
Please forgive if this is too early ping. Some i.MX93 dts update pending

Thanks,
Peng.

> 
> From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com>
> 
> V2:
>  use clk bulk API in driver to support backward compatibility.
>  Include a new patch, patch 1.
> 
> The i.MX LPI2C needs PER and IPG clock, not just PER or IPG clock.
> The current driver/dts/bindings use one CLK. Although it works with with
> upstream kernel, but it not match the hardware design. If IPG clock is
> disabled, the LPI2C will not work.
> 
> There are changes made to ARM32 i.MX7ULP dts, ARM64 i.MX8 dts, dt-
> bindings, and the lpi2c driver.
> 
> The driver is updated to use bulk clk API to avoid break backward
> compatibility. But it is hard to avoid dtbs_check pass, because the dts and
> binding update are in separate patches.
> 
> Peng Fan (7):
>   ARM: dts: imx7ulp: update the LPI2C clock-names
>   dt-bindings: i2c: i2c-imx-lpi2c: add ipg clk
>   dt-bindings: i2c: i2c-imx-lpi2c: add dmas property
>   dt-bindings: i2c: i2c-imx-lpi2c: add i.MX93
>   arm64: dts: imx8-ss-dma: add IPG clock for i2c
>   ARM: dts: imx7ulp: Add IPG clock for lpi2c
>   i2c: imx-lpi2c: use bulk clk API
> 
>  .../bindings/i2c/i2c-imx-lpi2c.yaml           | 20 +++++++++++++---
>  arch/arm/boot/dts/imx7ulp.dtsi                | 10 ++++----
>  .../arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8-ss-dma.dtsi | 20 +++++++++-------
>  drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-imx-lpi2c.c            | 24 +++++++++----------
>  4 files changed, 47 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
> 
> --
> 2.37.1

On 22/08/2022 11:46, Peng Fan wrote:
>> Subject: [PATCH V2 0/7] i2c-imx-lpi2c: add IPG clock
> 
> + Wolfram Sang I2C maintainer.
> 
> Krzysztof,
> 
> Do you have time to give a look whether this patchset is ok for you?
> Please forgive if this is too early ping. Some i.MX93 dts update pending
> 

I don't understand the ping. You got everything needed from us, why
still pinging? What that DTS has anything to do with us?

Best regards,
Krzysztof

> Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 0/7] i2c-imx-lpi2c: add IPG clock
> 
> On 22/08/2022 11:46, Peng Fan wrote:
> >> Subject: [PATCH V2 0/7] i2c-imx-lpi2c: add IPG clock
> >
> > + Wolfram Sang I2C maintainer.
> >
> > Krzysztof,
> >
> > Do you have time to give a look whether this patchset is ok for you?
> > Please forgive if this is too early ping. Some i.MX93 dts update
> > pending
> >
> 
> I don't understand the ping. You got everything needed from us, why still
> pinging? What that DTS has anything to do with us?

In last version, you raised a comment that the driver patch broke ABI, not
backward compatible. So I updated the driver patch to be backward
compatible in V3 :)

Thanks for your review for the binding patches, I have included your tag in V3
For driver/dts part, I2C & i.MX maintainer will review.

Thanks,
Peng.

> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof

On 23/08/2022 15:49, Peng Fan wrote:
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 0/7] i2c-imx-lpi2c: add IPG clock
>>
>> On 22/08/2022 11:46, Peng Fan wrote:
>>>> Subject: [PATCH V2 0/7] i2c-imx-lpi2c: add IPG clock
>>>
>>> + Wolfram Sang I2C maintainer.
>>>
>>> Krzysztof,
>>>
>>> Do you have time to give a look whether this patchset is ok for you?
>>> Please forgive if this is too early ping. Some i.MX93 dts update
>>> pending
>>>
>>
>> I don't understand the ping. You got everything needed from us, why still
>> pinging? What that DTS has anything to do with us?
> 
> In last version, you raised a comment that the driver patch broke ABI, not
> backward compatible. So I updated the driver patch to be backward
> compatible in V3 :)

Awesome! But you don't need my ack after such update. The ack or review
is expected from maintainers and I am not the maintainer of IMX I2C
driver or IMX platform/DTS. There is no need in pinging folks just for
some comments. We are all too busy...

Please read:

https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.19/source/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst

https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.19/source/Documentation/process/1.Intro.rst
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.19/source/Documentation/process/5.Posting.rst
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.19/source/Documentation/process/6.Followthrough.rst


Best regards,
Krzysztof

Hi Krzysztof,

> Awesome! But you don't need my ack after such update. The ack or review
> is expected from maintainers and I am not the maintainer of IMX I2C
> driver or IMX platform/DTS.

Despite the fact that the ping was in deed too early, I think Peng Fan
has a point. If you suggest a change (Thanks a ton for that!), a quick
comment on the new version if the change reflects what you had in mind,
is fair, I'd say. Something like "Yeah, looks basically good, but the
maintainers have to check the details." I understand the "all too busy"
part, of course...

Thanks,

   Wolfram