[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0671df0ea3568056e4d46112c4c9d132c64aed01.camel@codeconstruct.com.au>
Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2026 11:45:05 +1030
From: Andrew Jeffery <andrew@...econstruct.com.au>
To: Linus Walleij <linusw@...nel.org>
Cc: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Joel Stanley <joel@....id.au>,
linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-aspeed@...ts.ozlabs.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, openbmc@...ts.ozlabs.org,
linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 02/16] pinctrl: aspeed: g5: Constrain LPC binding
revision workaround to AST2500
On Wed, 2025-12-31 at 22:37 +0100, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 11, 2025 at 9:46 AM Andrew Jeffery
> <andrew@...econstruct.com.au> wrote:
>
> > Discovering a phandle to an AST2400 or AST2600 LPC node indicates an
> > error for the purpose of the AST2500 pinctrl driver.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Andrew Jeffery <andrew@...econstruct.com.au>
>
> Reviewed-by: Linus Walleij <linusw@...nel.org>
>
> Also pretty obviously correct, can't I just apply this one?
Yep, I'm happy for you to apply this one now. I marked the series RFC
because it's a bit of a scatter-gun set of changes and I figured there
might be more feedback than I've received so far :)
Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists