[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160222164234.GD13417@atomide.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 08:42:35 -0800
From: Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
To: Roger Quadros <rogerq@...com>
Cc: computersforpeace@...il.com, dwmw2@...radead.org,
ezequiel@...guardiasur.com.ar, javier@...hile0.org, fcooper@...com,
nsekhar@...com, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 00/26] memory: omap-gpmc: mtd: nand: Support GPMC NAND
on non-OMAP platforms
* Roger Quadros <rogerq@...com> [160222 02:16]:
> On 20/02/16 00:04, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > * Roger Quadros <rogerq@...com> [160219 13:27]:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> @Tony
> >> Patches 15 and 24 are new and will need your review.
> >> I've modified patch 22 to include the new am335x boards introduced since v4.4.
> >>
> >> Patches are based on top of omap-for-v4.6/dt so that the DT changes apply cleanly.
> >
> > Looks OK to me. Can we merge the dts changes separately? Otherwise
> > we will easily end up with tons of conflicts..
>
> I agree. But we just need to keep in mind that NAND functionality will be
> broken till all the patches in this series are merged. We don't maintain
> backward compatibility with the old DT implementation.
Please let's not do that! That breaks booting and git bisect.
It's better to have a minimal branch where each patch boots fine.
Also, I think you should at least print a warning for the old
binding. Otherwise people with out of tree boards will have
hard time updating their patches to send to mainline tree.
> Do you want me to send you the DT patches separately or you can
> pick up patches 18 to 26?
Sounds like some things need to be rearranged a bit first
though :)
Regards,
Tony
Powered by blists - more mailing lists