Re: [PATCH v3] Topcliff: Update PCH_I2C driver to 2.6.36

[Tomoya MORINAGA]

On Tuesday, October 26, 2010 8:26 PM, Jean Delvare wrote:
> It's not mandatory, but the time Ben and myself have to review new
> drivers is scarce, so it's in your own interest to have the code
> reviewed by people with more time and more interest in the specific
> hardware. I can only imagine that Intel wants Topcliff to be supported
> as soon as possible by the Linux kernel, so they should certainly have
> resources to allocate for the review and testing.

I see.

I will reuest Intel to review again and put signature.

> Hi Qi and Yong Y
Could you review this patch again and put signature?

Thanks, Tomoya(OKI SEMICONDUCTOR CO., LTD.)

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jean Delvare" <khali@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Tomoya MORINAGA" <tomoya-linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "Samuel Ortiz" <sameo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "Wolfram Sang" <w.sang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "Ralf Baechle"
<ralf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; <linux-i2c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "LKML" <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "Ben Dooks "
<ben-linux@xxxxxxxxx>; "Linus Walleij" <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "srinidhi kasagar"
<srinidhi.kasagar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "Tomoya MORINAGA" <morinaga526@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "Wang Qi" <qi.wang@xxxxxxxxx>; "Wang
Yong Y" <yong.y.wang@xxxxxxxxx>; <kok.howg.ewe@xxxxxxxxx>; <joel.clark@xxxxxxxxx>; <andrew.chih.howe.khor@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 8:26 PM
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] Topcliff: Update PCH_I2C driver to 2.6.36


> On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 18:47:37 +0900, Tomoya MORINAGA wrote:
> > Hi Jean,
> >
> > On Tuesday, October 26, 2010 6:13 PM, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > > The _pch becomes redundant then, i2c-topcliff.c would be enough, but
> > > both are fine with me, as my initial concern is gone.
> > I agree.
> > I will modify to "i2c-topcliff.c".
> >
> > > There's no Reviewed-by, Acked-by or Signed-off-by from anyone at Intel
> > > in the patch you posted.
> > Must we get Intel's signature ?
> > We have already got the following. Isn't  this enough ?
> > > Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Though I haven't heard like the requirement,
> > if Intel's signature is mandatory, I will request to Intel.
>
> It's not mandatory, but the time Ben and myself have to review new
> drivers is scarce, so it's in your own interest to have the code
> reviewed by people with more time and more interest in the specific
> hardware. I can only imagine that Intel wants Topcliff to be supported
> as soon as possible by the Linux kernel, so they should certainly have
> resources to allocate for the review and testing.
>
> -- 
> Jean Delvare
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/