Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] Fixes for omapdrm on OpenPandora and GTA04

[Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>]

* Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ti.com> [171130 10:56]:
> On 28/11/17 17:48, H. Nikolaus Schaller wrote:
> > Changes V3:
> > * stay compatible with old DTB files which still use "toppoly" (suggested by Tomi Valkeinen)
> > * replaced MODULE_ALIAS entries by MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE (suggested by Andrew F. Davis)
> > * removed DSI VDDS patch as it has already been accepted
> > 
> > 2017-11-16 09:50:22: Changes V2:
> > * replaced patch to fix DSI VDDS for OMAP3 by equivalent patch from Laurent Pinchart
> > * keep previous compatibility option in panel driver to handle older device tree binaries
> > 
> > 2017-11-08 22:09:36:
> > This patch set fixes vendor names of the panels
> > and fixes a problem on omapdrm with enabling
> > VDD_DSI for OMAP3 which is needed for displaying
> > the Red and Green channel on OMAP3530 (Pandora).
> > 
> > H. Nikolaus Schaller (4):
> >   omapdrm: panel: fix compatible vendor string for td028ttec1
> >   omapdrm: panel: td028ttec1: replace MODULE_ALIAS by
> >     MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE
> >   DTS: GTA04: fix panel compatibility string
> >   DTS: Pandora: fix panel compatibility string
> > 
> >  .../panel/{toppoly,td028ttec1.txt => tpo,td028ttec1.txt}    |  4 ++--
> >  arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3-gta04.dtsi                          |  2 +-
> >  arch/arm/boot/dts/omap3-pandora-common.dtsi                 |  2 +-
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/omapdrm/displays/panel-tpo-td028ttec1.c     | 13 ++++++++++++-
> >  .../fbdev/omap2/omapfb/displays/panel-tpo-td028ttec1.c      | 12 +++++++++++-
> >  5 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >  rename Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/panel/{toppoly,td028ttec1.txt => tpo,td028ttec1.txt} (84%)
> > 
> 
> Thanks. I have picked up patches 1 and 2.
> 
> 3 can be applied when 1 & 2 are in. The change in 4 could be applied
> independently, but it conflicts with 3.
> 
> Tony, how do you want to handle 3 and 4? I will push 1 and 2 to v4.16. I
> don't think they are real issues, so I don't see a reason to push them
> as fixes to v4.15. I think they are mostly just cleanups, and we might
> as well wait until v4.17, but that's quite far away...

In general to avoid the huge hassle of cross tree dependencies and
confusion if the dts changes are fixes, I suggest the following:

1. Nikolaus reposts the dts changes to not say word "fix" in them
   and use "update to use new binding" or something similar to avoid
   patches wrongly getting picked into earlier stable trees

2. Then I can ack the patches as they are just oneliners and
   unlikely to conflict with anything else

Regards,

Tony