[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20231018205232.p5d4xaqsd5fcbvfi@pengutronix.de>
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2023 22:52:32 +0200
From: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
Cc: Devi Priya <quic_devipriy@...cinc.com>, agross@...nel.org,
andersson@...nel.org, konrad.dybcio@...aro.org, lee@...nel.org,
robh+dt@...nel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org,
conor+dt@...nel.org, thierry.reding@...il.com,
ndesaulniers@...gle.com, trix@...hat.com, baruch@...s.co.il,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, llvm@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org, nathan@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V15 0/4] Add PWM support for IPQ chipsets
Hello,
On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 06:29:30PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 05/10/2023 18:05, Devi Priya wrote:
> > Add PWM driver and binding support for IPQ chipsets.
> > Also, add support for pwm node in ipq6018.
> >
>
> You need to clearly mark dependencies.
This is something I wouldn't blame Devi for. The dependency is not very
obvious and its kind of normal and expected for a patch series to have
dependencies. *shrug*
> Next is now broken because of this patchset.
If I understand correctly this affects "only" the dtb check targets,
right? Is this bad enough that it needs an urgent fix? I would expect it
doesn't hurt much, am I right here?
I just looked into patch #2 and had a few comments for it.
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists