Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1662063 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH v2 01/11] pinctrl: dt-bindings: add documentation for AP806 pin controllers

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [PATCH v2 01/11] pinctrl: dt-bindings: add documentation for  AP806 pin controllers Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> - 2017-06-09 10:00 +0200
    Re: [PATCH v2 01/11] pinctrl: dt-bindings: add documentation for AP806 pin controllers Gregory CLEMENT <gregory.clement@free-electrons.com> - 2017-06-09 10:10 +0200
      Re: [PATCH v2 01/11] pinctrl: dt-bindings: add documentation for  AP806 pin controllers Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> - 2017-06-12 00:00 +0200

#1662063 — Re: [PATCH v2 01/11] pinctrl: dt-bindings: add documentation for AP806 pin controllers

On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 4:23 PM, Gregory CLEMENT
<gregory.clement@free-electrons.com> wrote:

> Document the device tree binding for the pin controllers found on the
> Armada 7K and Armada 8K SoCs.
>
> Acked-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Gregory CLEMENT <gregory.clement@free-electrons.com>

This patch does not apply to any of my branches, I have no clue
what tree you're basing this on.

I would prefer a series based on a pure v4.12-rc2 I think, as this
is what both the pin control and GPIO development branches
is based on, unless you have a better merge strategy to suggest?

I hope for the love of god that this does not also clash with the
PWM stuff that is patching around in the GPIO tree, if it does
I might very well throw up my hands and defer merging all of
this until the next kernel cycle past v4.13-rc1.

Please rebase on v4.12-rc2 and resend.

Yours,
Linus Walleij

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1662069 — Re: [PATCH v2 01/11] pinctrl: dt-bindings: add documentation for AP806 pin controllers

Hi Linus,
 
 On ven., juin 09 2017, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org> wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 4:23 PM, Gregory CLEMENT
> <gregory.clement@free-electrons.com> wrote:
>
>> Document the device tree binding for the pin controllers found on the
>> Armada 7K and Armada 8K SoCs.
>>
>> Acked-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Gregory CLEMENT <gregory.clement@free-electrons.com>
>
> This patch does not apply to any of my branches, I have no clue
> what tree you're basing this on.
>
> I would prefer a series based on a pure v4.12-rc2 I think, as this
> is what both the pin control and GPIO development branches
> is based on, unless you have a better merge strategy to suggest?

As I wrote in the cover letter :
"The patch modifying the documentation still depend on the ones of the
clk series. For the ap806 a first stable branch is already available:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/clk/linux.git/log/?h=clk-ap806"

In the previous version of the series the clk maintainer said they will
provide stable branch for the documentation. For ap806 it is already
done, but not yet for cp110. But if you still have problem with it Rob
offer to take care of the devie tree documentation.

Just let us know what you prefer.

>
> I hope for the love of god that this does not also clash with the
> PWM stuff that is patching around in the GPIO tree, if it does
> I might very well throw up my hands and defer merging all of
> this until the next kernel cycle past v4.13-rc1.

To avoid this kind of issues the series are based on next-20170531 in
order to have in the same time the devel branch of the linux-gpio tree
and the devel branch of the linux-pinctrl tree.


>
> Please rebase on v4.12-rc2 and resend.

I use the linux-next tree because you already picked up some patches of
my first series and applied it on your devel branches. If I rebased on
v4;12-rc2, obviously it won't work. So really basing the series on your
devel branch is the best thing to do.

I saw that you already applied the PWM patch so as soon as they were
visible on the devel branches I will rebased the series on it and submit
it a new version.

Thanks,

Gregory

>
> Yours,
> Linus Walleij

-- 
Gregory Clement, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1663159

On Fri, Jun 9, 2017 at 10:07 AM, Gregory CLEMENT
<gregory.clement@free-electrons.com> wrote:

> As I wrote in the cover letter :
> "The patch modifying the documentation still depend on the ones of the
> clk series. For the ap806 a first stable branch is already available:
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/clk/linux.git/log/?h=clk-ap806"

Sorry I may miss things like that... usually it is better if patches
that depend on each other for merging are in the same series.

> In the previous version of the series the clk maintainer said they will
> provide stable branch for the documentation. For ap806 it is already
> done, but not yet for cp110. But if you still have problem with it Rob
> offer to take care of the devie tree documentation.
>
> Just let us know what you prefer.

I don't understand. Tell me what I need to do or we can just wait
a kernel cycle before merging this I guess.

Either I need an immutable branch or I merge the clock patches
I guess. Neither is very good but I'm open to compromises.

>> I hope for the love of god that this does not also clash with the
>> PWM stuff that is patching around in the GPIO tree, if it does
>> I might very well throw up my hands and defer merging all of
>> this until the next kernel cycle past v4.13-rc1.
>
> To avoid this kind of issues the series are based on next-20170531 in
> order to have in the same time the devel branch of the linux-gpio tree
> and the devel branch of the linux-pinctrl tree.

I see. Well if nothing else works, we just defer.

> I use the linux-next tree because you already picked up some patches of
> my first series and applied it on your devel branches. If I rebased on
> v4;12-rc2, obviously it won't work. So really basing the series on your
> devel branch is the best thing to do.

Indeed, sorry, the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is
doing sometimes.

> I saw that you already applied the PWM patch so as soon as they were
> visible on the devel branches I will rebased the series on it and submit
> it a new version.

OK

Yours,
Linus Walleij

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web