[linux-yocto] [PATCH 00/24] [3.14] Baytrail driver updates

[Bruce Ashfield]

On 14-05-13 12:35 PM, Darren Hart wrote:
> On 5/13/14, 9:29, "Bruce Ashfield" <bruce.ashfield at windriver.com> wrote:
>
>> On 14-05-13 12:11 PM, Darren Hart wrote:
>>> A number of incremental fixes have been made upstream and in
>>> linux-next. There
>>> are a couple still under review, but which are functional and useful.
>>> All
>>> non-mainline patches are annotated as such in the commit message, but
>>> for
>>> reference, the top 7 patches are not yet in mainline:
>>>
>>> d0047ab acpi_lpss: Add Bay Trail pinctrl HID
>>> 97d42f9 spi/pxa2xx: Add common clock framework support in PCI glue layer
>>> ac5ccf2 clkdev: Export clk_register_clkdev
>>> 6d381c2 pwm: lpss: Fix const qualifier and sparse warnings
>>> e4a7de2 pwm: lpss: Add support for PCI devices
>>> e2eb8ab drm/i915/vlv: reset VLV media force wake request register
>>> f695f17 spi/pxa2xx-pci: Add PCI mode support for BayTrail LPSS SPI
>>>
>>> Of those, the top three are still undergoing review, and only:
>>>
>>> 97d42f9 spi/pxa2xx: Add common clock framework support in PCI glue layer
>>>
>>> Adds any new functionality. It has received considerable review and
>>> should be
>>> close to acceptance. It is required to use the SPI device when
>>> enumerated as PCI
>>> on Baytrail platforms.
>>
>> I can live with the above.
>>
>>>
>>>   From a high level, this series accomplishes the following:
>>> * Fix MMC in ACPI mode
>>> * Enable PCI mode for SPI and PWM
>>> * Fix an i915 initialization hang when no display is connected at boot
>>
>> excellent.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The following changes since commit
>>> b0b9c962ea01f9356fc1542b9696ebe4a38e196a:
>>>
>>>     Merge tag 'v3.14.2' into standard/base (2014-04-28 23:52:14 -0400)
>>>
>>> are available in the git repository at:
>>>
>>>
>>>     git://git.yoctoproject.org/linux-yocto-3.14 dvhart/standard/minnowmax
>>>
>>> http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit.cgi/linux-yocto-3.14/log/?h=dvhart/stand
>>> ard/minnowmax
>>>
>>
>> And to confirm .. you do want this on a minnowmax "holding zone" branch ?
>
> Blarg, I missed that rather critical point. Given that this is pretty much
> all ready to go, I'd prefer this goes to standard/base. If we don't want
> anything on standard/base that isn't a mainline backport, then we should
> discuss a standard/intel branch as this is intel-common material, and not
> necessarily BSP specific.

That's fine with me. I assumed standard/base, but when I saw the branch
in your pull request .. I had to ask!

Bruce

>