[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <78c9c9f7-7e7c-abde-066a-240d642f3412@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2021 12:07:45 -0800
From: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ux-watchdog.org>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
"maintainer:BROADCOM BCM63XX ARM ARCHITECTURE"
<bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>,
Justin Chen <justinpopo6@...il.com>,
"open list:WATCHDOG DEVICE DRIVERS" <linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS"
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:MIPS" <linux-mips@...r.kernel.org>,
"moderated list:BROADCOM BCM63XX ARM ARCHITECTURE"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/7] Removal of bcm63xx-wdt
On 11/12/21 2:46 PM, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> his patch series prepares the bcm7038_wdt driver to support its bcm63xx
> counter part, updates the MIPS BCM63xx platform code to provide the
> necessary information about the "periph" clock, and finally proceeds
> with removing the bcm63xx_wdt altogether.
>
> This was only compiled tested as I did not have a readily available
> BCM63xx system to test with.
>
> This should also help with adding support for BCM4908 which Rafal is
> working on.
>
> Changes in v5:
> - removed unnecessary "bcm7038-wdt" platform devtype
> - added Rob's Reviewed-by tags to the 2 binding patches
>
> Changes in v4:
> - fixed binding patch (Rob, Guenter)
> - updated Kconfig description title to mention BCM63xx
>
> Changes in v3:
>
> - added Guenter's and Thomas' tags to patch 6
> - added missing initialization of id_table
> - use Rafal's latest binding patch
>
> Changes in v2:
>
> - added Guenter's Reviewed-by where given
> - update binding patch to pass make dt_bindings_check (Rob)
Are we good with this version? If so, could it be picked up so we have
one less driver to care about, and we have one additional binding
converted to YAML?
Thanks!
--
Florian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists