[GIT,PULL] i2c-host-fixes for v6.9-rc8

Hi Wolfram,

after a few weeks, we received to patches marked as fixes from
Christophe and Sai Pavan.

Thanks,
Andi

The following changes since commit dd5a440a31fae6e459c0d6271dddd62825505361:

  Linux 6.9-rc7 (2024-05-05 14:06:01 -0700)

are available in the Git repository at:

  git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/andi.shyti/linux.git tags/i2c-host-fixes-6.8-rc8

for you to fetch changes up to 55750148e5595bb85605e8fbb40b2759c2c4c2d7:

  i2c: synquacer: Fix an error handling path in synquacer_i2c_probe() (2024-05-06 10:58:04 +0200)

----------------------------------------------------------------
This tag includes two fixes. The first one, in the Cadence driver
seen in Qemu, prevents unintentional FIFO clearing at the
beginning of a transaction. The second fix, in the SynQuacer,
ensures proper error handling during clock get, prepare, and
enable operations by using the devm_clk_get_enabled() helper.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Christophe JAILLET (1):
      i2c: synquacer: Fix an error handling path in synquacer_i2c_probe()

Sai Pavan Boddu (1):
      i2c: cadence: Avoid fifo clear after start

 drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-cadence.c   |  1 +
 drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-synquacer.c | 20 +++++++-------------
 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

Hi Andi,

> after a few weeks, we received to patches marked as fixes from
> Christophe and Sai Pavan.

Sorry, I was away this weekend, so I couldn't get this into 6.9-final.
Yet, I think pulling into 6.10-rc1 and backporting to 6.9 should work as
well.

Thanks,

   Wolfram

Hi Wolfram,

> > after a few weeks, we received to patches marked as fixes from
> > Christophe and Sai Pavan.
> 
> Sorry, I was away this weekend, so I couldn't get this into 6.9-final.

no worries! Nothing seriously critical was missed :-)

> Yet, I think pulling into 6.10-rc1 and backporting to 6.9 should work as
> well.

If you want I can include them in the merge window pull request,
so that we fix also one of the two dependencies there. Then they
would find their way to the stable kernels.

Andi

> If you want I can include them in the merge window pull request,
> so that we fix also one of the two dependencies there. Then they
> would find their way to the stable kernels.

I merged now the 6.9 request and the 6.10 one on top. All seems well.
Did I miss a dependency between the two?

Hi Wolfram,

> > If you want I can include them in the merge window pull request,
> > so that we fix also one of the two dependencies there. Then they
> > would find their way to the stable kernels.
> 
> I merged now the 6.9 request and the 6.10 one on top. All seems well.
> Did I miss a dependency between the two?

No... all good here... there is no dependency between these two.

I will send a 6.10 part 2 merge request in a few days.

Thanks,
Andi

> I will send a 6.10 part 2 merge request in a few days.

Awesome, thank you!