[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <qywehfpajronx457jzaxpynjnae6wpl5uvswetr6nrtmmcm5wl@7rl5jfqsofzn>
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2024 09:39:08 +0100
From: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
To: Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>, Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>,
Boris Brezillon <bbrezillon@...nel.org>
Cc: Dharma.B@...rochip.com, krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org,
maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com, mripard@...nel.org, tzimmermann@...e.de, airlied@...il.com,
daniel@...ll.ch, robh+dt@...nel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org,
conor+dt@...nel.org, Nicolas.Ferre@...rochip.com, alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com,
claudiu.beznea@...on.dev, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, thierry.reding@...il.com,
linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org, Hari.PrasathGE@...rochip.com, Manikandan.M@...rochip.com,
Conor.Dooley@...rochip.com
Subject: Re: (subset) [linux][PATCH v6 3/3] dt-bindings: mfd: atmel,hlcdc:
Convert to DT schema format
Hello,
On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 08:20:26AM +0000, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Tue, 20 Feb 2024, Dharma.B@...rochip.com wrote:
> > On 12/02/24 3:53 pm, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > > On 08/02/2024 11:43, Lee Jones wrote:
> > >> On Fri, 02 Feb 2024 05:47:33 +0530, Dharma Balasubiramani wrote:
> > >>> Convert the atmel,hlcdc binding to DT schema format.
> > >>>
> > >>> Align clocks and clock-names properties to clearly indicate that the LCD
> > >>> controller expects lvds_pll_clk when interfaced with the lvds display. This
> > >>> alignment with the specific hardware requirements ensures accurate device tree
> > >>> configuration for systems utilizing the HLCDC IP.
> > >>>
> > >>> [...]
> > >>
> > >> Applied, thanks!
> > >>
> > >> [3/3] dt-bindings: mfd: atmel,hlcdc: Convert to DT schema format
> > >> commit: cb946db1335b599ece363d33966bf653ed0fa58a
> > >>
> > >
> > > Next is still failing.
>
> If this continues to be an issue, I can just remove the commit.
The missing part in next is that patch 1 isn't included. So the options
are:
a) Someone (dri or dt folks?) merges patch 1
This fixes the state in next, though some commits stay around that
fail dt_binding_check
b) Someone (mfd or dt?) merges all 3 patches in one go and the two
patches already applied are dropped.
This makes dt_binding_check happy for all revs.
For me a) is good enough, but I guess the dri people are not aware there
is something to do for them?! Would be nice if Sam or Boris commented.
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