[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3d6f254c-d53f-47d9-8081-8506d202bf9d@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2025 14:23:12 +0100
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Robert Marko <robert.marko@...tura.hr>
Cc: robh@...nel.org, krzk+dt@...nel.org, conor+dt@...nel.org,
nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com, alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com,
claudiu.beznea@...on.dev, Steen.Hegelund@...rochip.com,
daniel.machon@...rochip.com, UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com,
herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, davem@...emloft.net, vkoul@...nel.org,
linux@...ck-us.net, andi.shyti@...nel.org, lee@...nel.org,
andrew+netdev@...n.ch, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org,
pabeni@...hat.com, linusw@...nel.org, olivia@...enic.com,
radu_nicolae.pirea@....ro, richard.genoud@...tlin.com,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, jirislaby@...nel.org, mturquette@...libre.com,
sboyd@...nel.org, richardcochran@...il.com,
wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com, romain.sioen@...rochip.com,
Ryan.Wanner@...rochip.com, lars.povlsen@...rochip.com,
tudor.ambarus@...aro.org, charan.pedumuru@...rochip.com,
kavyasree.kotagiri@...rochip.com, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, dmaengine@...r.kernel.org,
linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, mwalle@...nel.org,
luka.perkov@...tura.hr
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 05/19] dt-bindings: arm: microchip: move SparX-5 to
generic Microchip binding
On 16/12/2025 18:01, Robert Marko wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 16, 2025 at 4:58 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 15/12/2025 17:35, Robert Marko wrote:
>>> Now that we have a generic Microchip binding, lets move SparX-5 as well as
>>> there is no reason to have specific binding file for each SoC series.
>>>
>>> The check for AXI node was dropped.
>>
>> Why?
>
> According to Conor, it is pointless [1]
You have entire commit msg to explain this. It's basically my third
question where reasoning behind changes is not explained.
When you send v3, you will get the same questions...
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists