[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230503010731.GA31464@dragon>
Date: Wed, 3 May 2023 09:07:31 +0800
From: Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>,
"Peng Fan (OSS)" <peng.fan@....nxp.com>,
"robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
"krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org"
<krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
"s.hauer@...gutronix.de" <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
Xu Yang <xu.yang_2@....com>,
"kernel@...gutronix.de" <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
"festevam@...il.com" <festevam@...il.com>,
dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@....com>,
"linux-usb@...r.kernel.org" <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, Jun Li <jun.li@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V7 10/10] ARM64: dts: imx7ulp: update usb compatible
On Thu, Apr 20, 2023 at 10:10:58AM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 06, 2023 at 09:40:13AM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 06, 2023 at 01:18:43AM +0000, Peng Fan wrote:
> > > Hi Shawn,
> > >
> > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH V7 10/10] ARM64: dts: imx7ulp: update usb compatible
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Mar 22, 2023 at 01:25:04PM +0800, Peng Fan (OSS) wrote:
> > > > > From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
> > > > >
> > > > > Per binding doc, update the compatible
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
> > > >
> > > > ARM: dts: imx7ulp: ...
> > > >
> > > > Fixed it up and applied all DTS patches.
> > > [Peng Fan]
> > >
> > > Thanks for the fix. But I think Greg already applied the patchset.
> >
> > Okay, I will drop them from my tree, but ...
> >
> > Greg,
> >
> > May I suggest a couple of things on the future process?
> >
> > - Could you leave i.MX DTS patches to me, so that we can avoid potential
> > merge conflicts?
>
> How am I supposed to know this?
Aren't we using patch prefix to tell the target subsystem?
> Our tools take the whole patch series,
> not individual ones. If someone wants patches to go through different
> trees, then they need to submit them as different patch series,
> otherwise it makes no sense.
It's a quite common practice that people send a series containing
multiple patches targeting different subsystems, as that's what
reviewers have been asking for sake of completeness. So we are asking
for two opposite things from what I can see.
Shawn
Powered by blists - more mailing lists