[PATCH 0/2] staging: mt7621-pinctrl: use pinconf-generic in some driver ops

[Sergio Paracuellos]

Hi Greg,

On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 9:32 AM Greg KH <gregkh at linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 03, 2019 at 09:23:57AM +0100, Sergio Paracuellos wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 3, 2019 at 3:02 AM NeilBrown <neil at brown.name> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Dec 31 2018, Sergio Paracuellos wrote:
> > >
> > > > dt_node_to_map and dt_free_map operations can use pinconf-generic API's
> > > > instead of redefine operations in the driver. Make use of them cleaning
> > > > a bit driver's code.
> > > >
> > > > Update DT accordly to make sure used bindings property in code match
> > > > with the board's DT bindings.
> > > >
> > > > Changes are only compile-tested.
> > >
> > > Thanks.  This appears to work for me.
> > > It is awkward to test pinctrl changes because the firmware preconfigures
> > > all the pins, so the hardware will work correctly if pinctrl does
> > > nothing.
> > > So I change the dts file to mis-configure some pins for driving LEDs,
> > > and checked that the LEDs broken.  The fixed the dts, and the LEDs
> > > started working again.
> > > I think that will have to do.
> > >
> > > Tested-by: NeilBrown <neil at brown.name>
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > NeilBrown
> >
> > Cool! Thanks for testing and let me know.
> >
> > So, I sent this patch which solves a problem:
> >
> > http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/pipermail/driverdev-devel/2018-December/130260.html
> >
> > And this new patch is generated with that applied. Also this patch
> > solves the original problem
> > also and seems the way to go... Should be better to re-do this one
> > with all the fixed and reported by
> > tags added as a solution?
> >
> > What do you prefer, Greg?
>
> I'm sorry, but I do not understand.  Is this 2 patch series not
> acceptable to merge?  Should I drop it and use some other patch series?
> Should I ignore some other patch series?

Sorry, let me try to explain it better.
Both this series and the patch in [1] can solve the same problem. Both
of them also work. This series can be applied after the patch in [1].
as a clean up because this series are rebased onto it. So the question
here is you don't have problems to take both of them or if I should
re-do this one with two patches as a solution of the problem and
forget about the one in [1].

[1]: http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/pipermail/driverdev-devel/2018-December/130260.html

>
> totally confused,

Hope this clarified things a bit?
>
> greg k-h

Best regards,
    Sergio Paracuellos