[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0716d9e4-24e1-d16c-162c-00a8664296e1@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2022 09:11:59 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: wangseok.lee@...sung.com,
"robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
"krzk+dt@...nel.org" <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
"kishon@...com" <kishon@...com>,
"vkoul@...nel.org" <vkoul@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"jesper.nilsson@...s.com" <jesper.nilsson@...s.com>,
"lars.persson@...s.com" <lars.persson@...s.com>
Cc: "bhelgaas@...gle.com" <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
"linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"lorenzo.pieralisi@....com" <lorenzo.pieralisi@....com>,
"kw@...ux.com" <kw@...ux.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...s.com" <linux-arm-kernel@...s.com>,
"kernel@...s.com" <kernel@...s.com>,
전문기 <moonki.jun@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Add support for Axis, ARTPEC-8 PCIe driver
On 28/03/2022 03:44, 이왕석 wrote:
> This series patches include newly PCIe support for Axis ARTPEC-8 SoC.
> ARTPEC-8 is the SoC platform of Axis Communications.
> PCIe controller driver and phy driver have been newly added.
> There is also a new MAINTAINER in the addition of phy driver.
> PCIe controller is designed based on Design-Ware PCIe controller IP
> and PCIe phy is desinged based on SAMSUNG PHY IP.
> It also includes modifications to the Design-Ware controller driver to
> run the 64bit-based ARTPEC-8 PCIe controller driver.
> It consists of 6 patches in total.
>
> This series has been tested on AXIS SW bring-up board
> with ARTPEC-8 chipset.
You lost mail threading. This makes reading this difficult for us. Plus
you sent something non-applicable (patch #2), so please resend.
Knowing recent Samsung reluctance to extend existing drivers and always
duplicate, please provide description/analysis why this driver cannot be
combined with existing driver. The answer like: we need several syscon
because we do not implement other frameworks (like interconnect) are not
valid.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists