Re: [PATCH v2 00/25] at24: remove

[Sekhar Nori]

On 13/11/18 7:31 PM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Now that nvmem has gained support for defining cells from board files and
> looking them up from relevant drivers[1], it's time for a respin of the
> previous series[2] that aims at removing struct at24_platform_data from
> the tree.
> 
> Since I took over maintainership of the at24 driver I've been working
> towards removing at24_platform_data in favor for device properties.
> 
> DaVinci is the only platform that's still using it - all other users
> have already been converted.
> 
> One of the obstacles in case of DaVinci is removing the setup() callback
> from the pdata struct, the only user of which are some davinci boards.
> 
> First we add support for nvmem to MTD in a way previously discussed with
> Boris Brezillon and Srinivas Kandagatla.
> 
> Then, since most boards use the EEPROM to store the MAC address, we register
> relevant cells for all users, implement a function that allows to read
> the MAC address from nvmem (and also replaces the previous DT-specific
> variant) and make davinci_emac aware of it.
> 
> Next we switch all davinci users to using at24 device properties instead
> of platform data. While we're at it: we remove all other traces of the
> setup callback and platform data from davinci.
> 
> Finally we remove the at24 platform data structure.
> 
> I kept the review tags in patches that haven't changed from the last
> submission.
> 
> As far as merging of this series goes: I'd like to avoid dragging it over
> four releases. The series is logically split into five groups:
> 
> patches 1-2: nvmem and mtd changes
> patches 3-9: davinci arch-specific changes

Applied patches 3-9 to davinci tree for v4.21

> patches 10-13: networking changes
> patches 14-24: davinci specific again
> patch 25: final at24 change
> 
> With that I believe we can do the following: Greg KH could pick up the
> first two patches into his char-misc tree. Sekhar would take the second
> group and the third would go through the networking tree since the first
> three sets are not linked in any way. This would be merged for 4.21. Then
> for the next release Sekhar would pick up 14-24, provide an immutable
> branch for me and I'd merge the final patch for at24 and send it upstream
> through Wolfram's i2c tree (maybe we could even delay the i2c PR in the
> merge window to avoid the immutable branch altogether).
> 
> [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/9/21/293
> [2] https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/8/8/528

Thanks,
Sekhar