mbox series

[v3,0/2] gpio: ts4900: Do not set DAT and OE together

Message ID 20220310011617.29660-1-kris@embeddedTS.com
Headers show
Series gpio: ts4900: Do not set DAT and OE together | expand

Message

Kris Bahnsen March 10, 2022, 1:16 a.m. UTC
Work around hardware race condition when setting DAT and OE in same
transaction. Also clean up license boilerplate and use SPDX.

I was not sure if it was preferred to make it a series or individual
patches. I went with series because "gpio: ts4900: Use SPDX header"
cannot cleanly apply by itself due to copyright year changes in the fix
commit. If this is not preferred, please let me know.

V3:
- Move addition of SPDX identifier to separate commit
- Remove license boilerplate in file

V2:
- Add Fixes tag

Kris Bahnsen (1):
  gpio: ts4900: Use SPDX header

Mark Featherston (1):
  gpio: ts4900: Do not set DAT and OE together

 drivers/gpio/gpio-ts4900.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++--------------
 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)

Comments

Bartosz Golaszewski March 10, 2022, 9:06 a.m. UTC | #1
On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 2:16 AM Kris Bahnsen <kris@embeddedts.com> wrote:
>
> Remove boilerplate, use the SPDX license identifier.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kris Bahnsen <kris@embeddedTS.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpio/gpio-ts4900.c | 10 +---------
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-ts4900.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-ts4900.c
> index d918d2df4de2..69854fd2382a 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-ts4900.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-ts4900.c
> @@ -1,17 +1,9 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
>  /*
>   * Digital I/O driver for Technologic Systems I2C FPGA Core
>   *
>   * Copyright (C) 2015, 2018 Technologic Systems
>   * Copyright (C) 2016 Savoir-Faire Linux
> - *
> - * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
> - * modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as
> - * published by the Free Software Foundation.
> - *
> - * This program is distributed "as is" WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY of any
> - * kind, whether expressed or implied; without even the implied warranty
> - * of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
> - * GNU General Public License version 2 for more details.
>   */
>
>  #include <linux/gpio/driver.h>
> --
> 2.11.0
>

Applied, thanks!

Bart
Andy Shevchenko March 10, 2022, 2:48 p.m. UTC | #2
On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 2:22 PM Kris Bahnsen <kris@embeddedts.com> wrote:
>
> From: Mark Featherston <mark@embeddedTS.com>

Same comments as per v2.
Kris Bahnsen March 10, 2022, 5:36 p.m. UTC | #3
On Thu, 2022-03-10 at 16:48 +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 2:22 PM Kris Bahnsen <kris@embeddedts.com> wrote:
> > 
> > From: Mark Featherston <mark@embeddedTS.com>
> 
> Same comments as per v2.
> 

Thanks, I'll get a v4 put together shortly to clean that up.
Kris Bahnsen March 10, 2022, 7:47 p.m. UTC | #4
On Thu, 2022-03-10 at 20:30 +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 6:36 PM Kris Bahnsen <kris@embeddedts.com> wrote:
> > 
> > On Thu, 2022-03-10 at 16:48 +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 2:22 PM Kris Bahnsen <kris@embeddedts.com> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > From: Mark Featherston <mark@embeddedTS.com>
> > > 
> > > Same comments as per v2.
> > > 
> > 
> > Thanks, I'll get a v4 put together shortly to clean that up.
> 
> Hey Kris,
> 
> I already sent it out to Linus, please create a follow-up patch for that.
> 
> Bart

Can you please clarify what that entails since Andy had requested changes to the
commit message. Should I just create a new patch on top of the commit already on
master to address the comment changes? How would I address commit message changes,
or is that not my responsibility at this point?

Thanks for all the help on learning this process thus far!

Kris
Andy Shevchenko March 11, 2022, 11:25 a.m. UTC | #5
On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 9:47 PM Kris Bahnsen <kris@embeddedts.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 2022-03-10 at 20:30 +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 6:36 PM Kris Bahnsen <kris@embeddedts.com> wrote:

...

> > Hey Kris,
> >
> > I already sent it out to Linus, please create a follow-up patch for that.

> Can you please clarify what that entails since Andy had requested changes to the
> commit message. Should I just create a new patch on top of the commit already on
> master to address the comment changes?

Address the comments.

> How would I address commit message changes,
> or is that not my responsibility at this point?

It's impossible.