Re: [PATCH v6 6/6] spi: spi-qcom-qspi: Use OPP API to set clk/perf state

From: Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@chromium.org>
To: Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@codeaurora.org>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
	bjorn.andersson@linaro.org, agross@kernel.org,
	robdclark@gmail.com, robdclark@chromium.org,
	stanimir.varbanov@linaro.org, viresh.kumar@linaro.org,
	sboyd@kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Alok Chauhan <alokc@codeaurora.org>,
	Akash Asthana <akashast@codeaurora.org>,
	linux-spi@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 6/6] spi: spi-qcom-qspi: Use OPP API to set clk/perf state
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2020 08:25:27 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200625152527.GG39073@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200624181245.GE39073@google.com>

On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 11:12:45AM -0700, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 07:00:05PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 10:55:36AM -0700, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 06:44:17PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > 
> > > > Wait, so *some* of the series should go together but not other bits?
> > > > But you want them split up for some reason?
> > 
> > > Yes, this will almost certainly be the case, even if not for this patch.
> > > I brought this up earlier (https://patchwork.kernel.org/cover/11604623/#23428709).
> > 
> > I'm not really reading any of this stuff for the series as a whole, as
> > far as I could tell I'd reviewed all my bits and was hoping whatever
> > random platform stuff needs sorting out was going to be sorted out so I
> > stopped getting copied on revisions :(
> 
> Sorry this caused you extra work, I only fully realized this when the series
> was basically ready to land :(
> 
> Avoiding unnecessary revision spam is another good reason to not combine
> technically unrelated patches in a single series.
> 
> If I notice similar series in the future I'll try to bring it up early.
> 
> > > For the QSPI patch you could argue to just take it through QCOM since the SPI
> > > patch of this series goes through this tree, up to you, I just want to make
> > > sure everybody is on the same page.
> > 
> > If there are some part of this that don't have a connection with the
> > rest of the series and should be applied separately please split them
> > out and send them separately so it's clear what's going on.
> 
> Rajendra, IIUC you have to re-spin this series anyway, please split it
> up in self-contained chunks.

One more thing: when you do the split it seems it would make sense to
include the DT changes that were initially part of this series
(https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-arm-msm/list/?series=278691&state=*)