[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+HBbNEKJ2qG4s51Gq9dh0uGuSwyPDfsq+mb5w6Kry6e9N0VSg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2025 14:32:49 +0100
From: Robert Marko <robert.marko@...tura.hr>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
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,
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 Wed, Dec 17, 2025 at 2:23 PM Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> 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...
Hi Krzysztof,
Considering that instead of merging the bindings LAN969x will be added
to Atmel instead,
this will be dropped in v3.
Sorry for the inconvenience.
Regards,
Robert
>
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
--
Robert Marko
Staff Embedded Linux Engineer
Sartura d.d.
Lendavska ulica 16a
10000 Zagreb, Croatia
Email: robert.marko@...tura.hr
Web: www.sartura.hr
Powered by blists - more mailing lists