[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <bf5f3517-13fa-4e8f-a22b-02be383a9148@oss.qualcomm.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2025 10:27:06 +0530
From: Kathiravan Thirumoorthy <kathiravan.thirumoorthy@....qualcomm.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
Conor Dooley
<conor+dt@...nel.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>,
Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@...ux-watchdog.org>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc: linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/6] dt-bindings: sram: qcom,imem: Document IPQ5424
compatible
On 4/9/2025 12:28 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 08/04/2025 10:49, Kathiravan Thirumoorthy wrote:
>> Add compatible for Qualcomm's IPQ5424 IMEM.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Kathiravan Thirumoorthy <kathiravan.thirumoorthy@....qualcomm.com>
>> ---
>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/sram/qcom,imem.yaml | 1 +
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> Why is this RFC? What is not finished here? I could not find explanation
> in cover letter.
I added the IMEM node to retrieve the restart reason which is used in
this series. Since I wasn't sure about the idea which is followed here,
I made the whole series as RFC. Going forward, I shall explain why the
series is made as RFC in cover letter.
With respect to this patch, nothing is pending. I can separate out the
dt-binding and DTS for IMEM from this series and post it. Please let me
know.
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists