[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20231208090754.fn3bddlum3t7kakn@pengutronix.de>
Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2023 10:07:54 +0100
From: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
To: Sebastian Reichel <sebastian.reichel@...labora.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>,
Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ian Ray <ian.ray@...com>,
NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@....com>,
Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
kernel@...labora.com, Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv5 0/2] Fix imx53-ppd UART configuration
[Cc += dt maintainers]
On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 07:50:36PM +0200, Sebastian Reichel wrote:
> IMHO PATCHv4 was better, but in the end I don't have strong feelings
> about this. Btw. I think this patchset is a good demonstration of
> frustrating upstream kernel development can be considering PATCHv5
> is basically the same as PATCHv1. Thanks for making us go in
> circles :(
I still like v4 better than v1/v5. I'm sorry for the frustration this
created on your side.
I'd ask Greg to reconsider given that dt is less flexible than a sysfs
knob and otherwise shares all downsides of sysfs (people don't want to
have to tune that, so a useful default for most cases is important; you
have to consult documentation to understand how to tune 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