[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <75768451-4c85-41fa-82b0-8847a118ea0a@quicinc.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2024 07:03:46 -0700
From: Nikunj Kela <quic_nkela@...cinc.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
CC: <andersson@...nel.org>, <konradybcio@...nel.org>, <robh@...nel.org>,
<krzk+dt@...nel.org>, <conor+dt@...nel.org>, <rafael@...nel.org>,
<viresh.kumar@...aro.org>, <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
<davem@...emloft.net>, <sudeep.holla@....com>, <andi.shyti@...nel.org>,
<tglx@...utronix.de>, <will@...nel.org>, <robin.murphy@....com>,
<joro@...tes.org>, <jassisinghbrar@...il.com>, <lee@...nel.org>,
<linus.walleij@...aro.org>, <amitk@...nel.org>,
<thara.gopinath@...il.com>, <broonie@...nel.org>,
<cristian.marussi@....com>, <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
<lukasz.luba@....com>, <wim@...ux-watchdog.org>, <linux@...ck-us.net>,
<linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>, <arm-scmi@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
<iommu@...ts.linux.dev>, <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org>, <kernel@...cinc.com>,
<quic_psodagud@...cinc.com>, Praveen Talari <quic_ptalari@...cinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 16/21] dt-bindings: spi: document support for SA8255p
On 9/5/2024 1:04 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 04/09/2024 23:06, Nikunj Kela wrote:
>> On 9/4/2024 9:58 AM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>>>> Sorry, didn't realize SPI uses different subject format than other
>>>> subsystems. Will fix in v3. Thanks
>>> Each subsystem is free to use its own form. e.g for netdev you will
>>> want the prefix [PATCH net-next v42] net: stmmac: dwmac-qcom-ethqos:
>> of course they are! No one is disputing that.
>>> This is another reason why you should be splitting these patches per
>>> subsystem, and submitting both the DT bindings and the code changes as
>>> a two patch patchset. You can then learn how each subsystem names its
>>> patches.
>> Qualcomm QUPs chips have serial engines that can be configured as
>> UART/I2C/SPI so QUPs changes require to be pushed in one series for all
>> 3 subsystems as they all are dependent.
> No, they are not dependent. They have never been. Look how all other
> upstreaming process worked in the past.
Top level QUP node(patch#18) includes i2c,spi,uart nodes.
soc/qcom/qcom,geni-se.yaml validate those subnodes against respective
yaml. The example that is added in YAML file for QUP node will not find
sa8255p compatibles if all 4 yaml(qup, i2c, spi, serial nodes) are not
included in the same series.
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists