[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <027842d4-cb5e-4f89-b7fe-345d68b68d55@oss.qualcomm.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2026 13:44:39 +0530
From: Krishna Kurapati <krishna.kurapati@....qualcomm.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>,
Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org,
Ronak Raheja <ronak.raheja@....qualcomm.com>,
Jingyi Wang <jingyi.wang@....qualcomm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] dt-bindings: phy: qcom,m31-eusb2-phy: Document M31
eUSB2 PHY for Kaanapali
On 1/8/2026 1:40 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 08, 2026 at 10:54:59AM +0530, Krishna Kurapati wrote:
>> From: Ronak Raheja <ronak.raheja@....qualcomm.com>
>>
>> Document M31 eUSB2 PHY for Kaanapali which handles the USB2 path. Use
>> fallback to indicate the compatibility of the M31 eUSB2 PHY on the
>> Kaanapali with that on the SM8750.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Ronak Raheja <ronak.raheja@....qualcomm.com>
>> Co-developed-by: Jingyi Wang <jingyi.wang@....qualcomm.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Jingyi Wang <jingyi.wang@....qualcomm.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Krishna Kurapati <krishna.kurapati@....qualcomm.com>
>> ---
>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,m31-eusb2-phy.yaml | 1 +
>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,m31-eusb2-phy.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,m31-eusb2-phy.yaml
>> index 409803874c97..cd6b84213a7c 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,m31-eusb2-phy.yaml
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/phy/qcom,m31-eusb2-phy.yaml
>> @@ -19,6 +19,7 @@ properties:
>> - items:
>> - enum:
>> - qcom,glymur-m31-eusb2-phy
>> + - qcom,kaanapali-m31-eusb2-phy
>
> Huh? So you did not add new compatible? It's exactly the same code, so
> the tag should have stayed. Really, do not overcomplicate things. There
> is no need to poke people on multiple channels to ask them if EXACTLY
> same patch retains the tag. It is already explained in submitting
> patches.
>
> Keep the previous ack.
>
Sure, will send v4 retaining the ACK.
Regards,
Krishna,
Powered by blists - more mailing lists