[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5942715.DvuYhMxLoT@phil>
Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2025 17:25:09 +0100
From: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>
To: Chukun Pan <amadeus@....edu.cn>,
Uwe Kleine-König <ukleinek@...nel.org>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Jonas Karlman <jonas@...boo.se>,
Yao Zi <ziyao@...root.org>, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: pwm: rockchip: Add rockchip,rk3528-pwm
Hi Uwe,
Am Freitag, 7. März 2025, 18:07:47 MEZ schrieb Uwe Kleine-König:
> On Fri, Mar 07, 2025 at 08:00:03PM +0800, Chukun Pan wrote:
> > Document pwm compatible for rk3528 which is fallback compatible
> > of rk3328-pwm group.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Chukun Pan <amadeus@....edu.cn>
>
> to prevent binding warnings it's probably sensible to let both patches
> go in via the same tree at the same time. Feel free to take the binding
> patch via rockchip/arm-soc.
>
> Acked-by: Uwe Kleine-König <ukleinek@...nel.org>
You already have the rk3562 binding in your for-next branch [0], which
could create merge-conflicts later on.
This patch already contains it, so should fit neatly onto your branch.
And binding warnings only come from linux-next, so won't trigger as the
pwm will feed the binding there too :-)
So I guess it might be better to take the binding through the pwm tree
and me then picking up the dts patch.
For the binding
Reviewed-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>
[0] https://web.git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/ukleinek/linux.git/commit/?h=pwm/for-next&id=058210e84b48dbb670a6bf72afaed6fbd8043a37
Powered by blists - more mailing lists