[PATCH v4 0/7] staging: fsl-mc: New functionality to the MC bus driver

[Jose Rivera]

Greg, 

Thanks for your feedback. It is our fault that we did not articulate
clearly our intent with this patch series. First, for reference, let
us summarize here the patches in question:

Patch 1: MC bus IRQ support
Patch 2: add device binding path 'driver_override'
Patch 3: Propagate driver_override for a child DPRC's children
Patch 4: Upgraded MC bus driver to match MC fw 7.0.0
Patch 5: Allow the MC bus driver to run without GIC support
Patch 6: Add locking to serialize mc_send_command() calls
Patch 7: Use DPMCP IRQ and completion var to wait for MC

With the exception of patches 2 and 3 (needed for vfio), our intent with
the rest was to make to changes to work towards completing the "Add at
least one device driver for a DPAA2 object" on the TODO list.

Before sending further patches we will submit an update to the TODO list
to provide more detail and visibility into our plan to complete the
"Add at least one device driver..." item.  It's too broad as written. 
In particular, we think interrupt support is required and a pre-requisite.

Thanks,

German

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Greg KH [mailto:gregkh at linuxfoundation.org]
> Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 7:19 PM
> To: Rivera Jose-B46482
> Cc: arnd at arndb.de; devel at driverdev.osuosl.org; linux-
> kernel at vger.kernel.org; Yoder Stuart-B08248; Sharma Bhupesh-B45370;
> agraf at suse.de; Hamciuc Bogdan-BHAMCIU1; Erez Nir-RM30794; katz Itai-
> RM05202; Wood Scott-B07421; Marginean Alexandru-R89243;
> dan.carpenter at oracle.com; Schmitt Richard-B43082
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/7] staging: fsl-mc: New functionality to the MC
> bus driver
> 
> On Tue, Jun 09, 2015 at 04:59:01PM -0500, J. German Rivera wrote:
> > This patch series includes new functionality for the Freescale fsl-mc
> > bus driver.
> 
> Why are people working on "new functionality" instead of working on
> getting this out of the staging tree?  I really hate adding new functions
> to staging drivers, as this is not the correct place for drivers to be in
> the tree.  People should be working to get them out of this location, and
> then you can add new functions to them.
> 
> So I really don't want to take this series, sorry, someone better start
> working on getting this out of drivers/staging/ or I'm going to have to
> drop the driver entirely from the tree.
> 
> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h