[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200625152527.GG39073@google.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2020 08:25:27 -0700
From: Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>
To: Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@...eaurora.org>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, bjorn.andersson@...aro.org,
agross@...nel.org, robdclark@...il.com, robdclark@...omium.org,
stanimir.varbanov@...aro.org, viresh.kumar@...aro.org,
sboyd@...nel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Alok Chauhan <alokc@...eaurora.org>,
Akash Asthana <akashast@...eaurora.org>,
linux-spi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 6/6] spi: spi-qcom-qspi: Use OPP API to set clk/perf
state
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 11:12:45AM -0700, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 07:00:05PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 10:55:36AM -0700, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 06:44:17PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> >
> > > > Wait, so *some* of the series should go together but not other bits?
> > > > But you want them split up for some reason?
> >
> > > Yes, this will almost certainly be the case, even if not for this patch.
> > > I brought this up earlier (https://patchwork.kernel.org/cover/11604623/#23428709).
> >
> > I'm not really reading any of this stuff for the series as a whole, as
> > far as I could tell I'd reviewed all my bits and was hoping whatever
> > random platform stuff needs sorting out was going to be sorted out so I
> > stopped getting copied on revisions :(
>
> Sorry this caused you extra work, I only fully realized this when the series
> was basically ready to land :(
>
> Avoiding unnecessary revision spam is another good reason to not combine
> technically unrelated patches in a single series.
>
> If I notice similar series in the future I'll try to bring it up early.
>
> > > For the QSPI patch you could argue to just take it through QCOM since the SPI
> > > patch of this series goes through this tree, up to you, I just want to make
> > > sure everybody is on the same page.
> >
> > If there are some part of this that don't have a connection with the
> > rest of the series and should be applied separately please split them
> > out and send them separately so it's clear what's going on.
>
> Rajendra, IIUC you have to re-spin this series anyway, please split it
> up in self-contained chunks.
One more thing: when you do the split it seems it would make sense to
include the DT changes that were initially part of this series
(https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-arm-msm/list/?series=278691&state=*)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists