From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Maxime Ripard Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/6] dt-bindings: pinctrl: Deprecate sunxi pinctrl bindings Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 15:41:50 +0200 Message-ID: <20161025134150.dct42swdbwxzgbgb@lukather> References: <6aec73cd3b9d3dbf1085d042ec6c23f385a300de.1476971126.git-series.maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> <20161024194917.g5oezqc4uacsyt24@lukather> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="apd5djy6lqcuh5bx" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Linus Walleij Cc: Chen-Yu Tsai , "linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , Rob Herring List-Id: linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org --apd5djy6lqcuh5bx Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Linus, On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 02:07:27PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 9:49 PM, Maxime Ripard > wrote: >=20 > > However, it looks like the first patch from this serie is missing from > > your tree, is there a reason for that? >=20 > No can you point it out? Sure: http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2016-October/462500.h= tml > > Also, in order to preserve bisectability, could you create an > > immutable branch for those sunxi patches so that I can merge the DT > > bits? >=20 > It's too late because they are already in the devel branch > and mixed up with merged of *other* immutable stuff. Hmmmm, ok. > However I think it is plain wrong to try to keep any bisectability > between the kernel at large and arch/*/boot/dts/*, because > the DTS stuff is supposed to at some point be maintained outside > of the kernel and for all OSes, they simply shouldn't be sync:ed. Yes, in the case of a new driver that needs to be introduced, I definitely get your point. However, during a conversion like we're doing here, this is not ideal, because it essentially means that you will not have a branch that works, at all. I'll hold off on those patches until 4.11 then. Thanks! Maxime --=20 Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com --apd5djy6lqcuh5bx Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJYD2EaAAoJEBx+YmzsjxAg3WAP/RWb5dtZ07Ab4xYAnD+NZpPb jDGCoEvYjFE0oR+vpY02wtv+ldNN3YKhMCPz4gKKyCqx+7JwVuGkDOKePrguAk4O 7NLR2knB/Tg1HqI9KrKiiZByPJdNL8A6uwhoZgobGY3OMkAq83EtRL53aB7negmT P3Dn5m3rd8LVY1NvLEiSDdTiZ0gM6jRmmO4abgXEioBjLfp0wa87mHx/JIKDyl6I RLMRvoUj9dvy5DLCWEFJ6fgrg0sL5NRMdPotWgIZJS0LygSwBAlnsAhdV/37+o+N XmHQTIoj+KR/v/5hyMTRbAYUXyi5HWK5JF5hi0jdtSviZ6MpxpJjyz2jUTq9Z4Jw y+EBGd6DsA+hK5+HtOMCqP71rofFzl/orumcpqeY9iw66WLNFj0pM1yf0Wq7nf0j s+pg4xhxp/FsfhVCSCK16alz/fxWMxfgtT5WcOBHi6Yx40fcGefQtsBxC+6eky5q iaA0EQjxIDILA+CIxRBYZQ2jp6JJ1cjpgvWX9B3DdzBWH4YbCIRdz+P1pGQLsB/t s3x7XaekPa7AQ30MapPUX5Cc0qyo7L0KPW43P8+joZDBIqH/CSJCr1egiJKNbhmJ sqnQjf6k0r5kr4pVwXEzcfuZ08lrHhSjngaEGNfatbXUYyqsDR+/IqZeWuqA4x7z aoBniwskIRr2Nb+ePBKd =i9KZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --apd5djy6lqcuh5bx-- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S936101AbcJZWLk (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Oct 2016 18:11:40 -0400 Received: from up.free-electrons.com ([163.172.77.33]:53521 "EHLO mail.free-electrons.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S935869AbcJZWKN (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Oct 2016 18:10:13 -0400 Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 15:41:50 +0200 From: Maxime Ripard To: Linus Walleij Cc: Chen-Yu Tsai , "linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , Rob Herring Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/6] dt-bindings: pinctrl: Deprecate sunxi pinctrl bindings Message-ID: <20161025134150.dct42swdbwxzgbgb@lukather> References: <6aec73cd3b9d3dbf1085d042ec6c23f385a300de.1476971126.git-series.maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> <20161024194917.g5oezqc4uacsyt24@lukather> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="apd5djy6lqcuh5bx" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.2-neo (2016-08-21) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --apd5djy6lqcuh5bx Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Linus, On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 02:07:27PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 9:49 PM, Maxime Ripard > wrote: >=20 > > However, it looks like the first patch from this serie is missing from > > your tree, is there a reason for that? >=20 > No can you point it out? Sure: http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2016-October/462500.h= tml > > Also, in order to preserve bisectability, could you create an > > immutable branch for those sunxi patches so that I can merge the DT > > bits? >=20 > It's too late because they are already in the devel branch > and mixed up with merged of *other* immutable stuff. Hmmmm, ok. > However I think it is plain wrong to try to keep any bisectability > between the kernel at large and arch/*/boot/dts/*, because > the DTS stuff is supposed to at some point be maintained outside > of the kernel and for all OSes, they simply shouldn't be sync:ed. Yes, in the case of a new driver that needs to be introduced, I definitely get your point. However, during a conversion like we're doing here, this is not ideal, because it essentially means that you will not have a branch that works, at all. I'll hold off on those patches until 4.11 then. Thanks! Maxime --=20 Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com --apd5djy6lqcuh5bx Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJYD2EaAAoJEBx+YmzsjxAg3WAP/RWb5dtZ07Ab4xYAnD+NZpPb jDGCoEvYjFE0oR+vpY02wtv+ldNN3YKhMCPz4gKKyCqx+7JwVuGkDOKePrguAk4O 7NLR2knB/Tg1HqI9KrKiiZByPJdNL8A6uwhoZgobGY3OMkAq83EtRL53aB7negmT P3Dn5m3rd8LVY1NvLEiSDdTiZ0gM6jRmmO4abgXEioBjLfp0wa87mHx/JIKDyl6I RLMRvoUj9dvy5DLCWEFJ6fgrg0sL5NRMdPotWgIZJS0LygSwBAlnsAhdV/37+o+N XmHQTIoj+KR/v/5hyMTRbAYUXyi5HWK5JF5hi0jdtSviZ6MpxpJjyz2jUTq9Z4Jw y+EBGd6DsA+hK5+HtOMCqP71rofFzl/orumcpqeY9iw66WLNFj0pM1yf0Wq7nf0j s+pg4xhxp/FsfhVCSCK16alz/fxWMxfgtT5WcOBHi6Yx40fcGefQtsBxC+6eky5q iaA0EQjxIDILA+CIxRBYZQ2jp6JJ1cjpgvWX9B3DdzBWH4YbCIRdz+P1pGQLsB/t s3x7XaekPa7AQ30MapPUX5Cc0qyo7L0KPW43P8+joZDBIqH/CSJCr1egiJKNbhmJ sqnQjf6k0r5kr4pVwXEzcfuZ08lrHhSjngaEGNfatbXUYyqsDR+/IqZeWuqA4x7z aoBniwskIRr2Nb+ePBKd =i9KZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --apd5djy6lqcuh5bx-- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com (Maxime Ripard) Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 15:41:50 +0200 Subject: [PATCH v3 3/6] dt-bindings: pinctrl: Deprecate sunxi pinctrl bindings In-Reply-To: References: <6aec73cd3b9d3dbf1085d042ec6c23f385a300de.1476971126.git-series.maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> <20161024194917.g5oezqc4uacsyt24@lukather> Message-ID: <20161025134150.dct42swdbwxzgbgb@lukather> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi Linus, On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 02:07:27PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 9:49 PM, Maxime Ripard > wrote: > > > However, it looks like the first patch from this serie is missing from > > your tree, is there a reason for that? > > No can you point it out? Sure: http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2016-October/462500.html > > Also, in order to preserve bisectability, could you create an > > immutable branch for those sunxi patches so that I can merge the DT > > bits? > > It's too late because they are already in the devel branch > and mixed up with merged of *other* immutable stuff. Hmmmm, ok. > However I think it is plain wrong to try to keep any bisectability > between the kernel at large and arch/*/boot/dts/*, because > the DTS stuff is supposed to at some point be maintained outside > of the kernel and for all OSes, they simply shouldn't be sync:ed. Yes, in the case of a new driver that needs to be introduced, I definitely get your point. However, during a conversion like we're doing here, this is not ideal, because it essentially means that you will not have a branch that works, at all. I'll hold off on those patches until 4.11 then. Thanks! Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 801 bytes Desc: not available URL: