[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181018130105.2guhavajp754qbnk@verge.net.au>
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2018 15:01:05 +0200
From: Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>
To: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
"moderated list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
Grant Likely <glikely@...retlab.ca>,
Kumar Gala <kumar.gala@...aro.org>,
Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Tom Rini <trini@...sulko.com>,
Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@...sulko.com>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>,
"open list:MEDIA DRIVERS FOR RENESAS - FCP"
<linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 29/36] dt-bindings: arm: Convert Renesas board/soc
bindings to json-schema
On Mon, Oct 08, 2018 at 09:05:58AM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 3:02 AM Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 05, 2018 at 11:58:41AM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
> > > Convert Renesas SoC bindings to DT schema format using json-schema.
> > >
> > > Cc: Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>
> > > Cc: Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>
> > > Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
> > > Cc: linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org
> > > Cc: devicetree@...r.kernel.org
> > > Signed-off-by: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
> >
> > This seems fine to me other than that it does not seem
> > to apply cleanly to next.
> >
> > shmobile.txt sees a couple of updates per release cycle so from my point of
> > view it would ideal if this change could hit -rc1 to allow patches for
> > v4.21 to be accepted smoothly (already one from Sergei will need rebasing).
>
> When we get to the point of merging (which isn't going to be 4.20),
> you and other maintainers can probably take all these patches. Other
> than the few restructuring patches, the only dependency is the build
> support which isn't a dependency to apply it, but build it. I plan to
> build any patches as part of reviewing at least early on. OTOH, the
> build support is small enough and self contained that maybe it can
> just be applied for 4.20.
Thanks, understood.
My preference would be to, as you suggest, take changes like
this through the renesas tree.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists