[lkml]   [2018]   [Sep]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 00/11] mscc: ocelot: add support for SerDes muxing configuration
On 04/09/2018 16:03:51-0700, Paul Burton wrote:
> Well, it sounded like David is OK with this all going through the MIPS
> tree, though we'd need an ack for the PHY parts.
> Alternatively I'd be happy for the DT changes to go through the net-next
> tree, which may make more sense given that the .dts changes are pretty
> trivial in comparison with the driver changes. If David wants to do that
> then for patches 1 & 8:
> Acked-by: Paul Burton <>
> Either way there may be conflicts for ocelot.dtsi when it comes to
> merging to master, but they should be simple to resolve. It seems
> Wolfram already took your DT changes for I2C so there's probably going
> to be multiple trees updating that file this cycle already anyway.

Actually, I think Wolfram meant that he took the bindings so you can
take the DT patches for i2c.

> Ideally I'd say "don't break bisection" but that's sort of a separate
> issue here since even if you restructure your series to do that it would
> still need to go through one tree. For example you could adjust
> mscc_ocelot_probe() to handle either the reg property or the syscon,
> then adjust the DT to use the syscon, then remove the code dealing with
> the reg property, and I'd consider that a good idea anyway but it would
> still probably all need to go through one tree to make sure things get
> merged in the right order & avoid breaking bisection.

I don't really think bisection is important at this stage but if you
don't want to break it, then I guess it makes more sense to have the
whole series through net.

Alexandre Belloni, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering

 \ /
  Last update: 2018-09-05 11:09    [W:0.074 / U:0.152 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site