From: Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: Shawn Guo <shawnguo@kernel.org>, York Sun <york.sun@nxp.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
yangbo lu <yangbo.lu@freescale.com>, Liu Gang <Gang.Liu@nxp.com>,
morbidrsa@gmail.com,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
"devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
Bhupesh Sharma <bhupesh.sharma@freescale.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
stuart.yoder@nxp.com,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
oss@buserror.net, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
Rajesh Bhagat <rajesh.bhagat@freescale.com>,
Mingkai Hu <Mingkai.Hu@freescale.com>,
Li Yang <leoli@freescale.com>, Yuan Yao <yao.yuan@nxp.com>,
linux-edac@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Patch v4 9/9] arm64: Update device tree for Layerscape SoCs
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2016 14:39:21 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAOesGMjg3XNrVESr+fS-D5HkwVZEx+ng8TCUriRyohCu0NvJAQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160829080530.GA25468@nazgul.tnic>
On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 1:05 AM, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 02:34:48PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
>> Is it mandatory to have DTS changes go with driver part altogether?
>
> Yes, because the EDAC driver needs them to even load properly.
>
>> Otherwise, I prefer to have them go through separate tree.
>
> Any particular reason why you prefer that?
>
> We've been doing this for other ARM EDAC drivers already and there were
> no issues whatsoever.
DT changes need to go through arm-soc. It's how we've been operating
for several years now.
It can be a huge pain when DT patches get merged through driver trees
and others are also modifying those files. Don't do it. You don't know
if someone else out there is changing these files, that's why we have
maintainers who own them and coordinate the changes.
If there are special circumstances such that the DT contents has to go
in with the same tree, then we can consider alternatives. But I can't
remember having one of those situations for quite a while now.
-Olof
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: Shawn Guo <shawnguo@kernel.org>, York Sun <york.sun@nxp.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
yangbo lu <yangbo.lu@freescale.com>, Liu Gang <Gang.Liu@nxp.com>,
morbidrsa@gmail.com,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
"devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
Bhupesh Sharma <bhupesh.sharma@freescale.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
stuart.yoder@nxp.com,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
oss@buserror.net, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
Rajesh Bhagat <rajesh.bhagat@freescale.com>,
Mingkai Hu <Mingkai.Hu@freescale.com>,
Li Yang <leoli@freescale.com>, Yuan Yao <yao.yuan@nxp.com>linux-
Subject: Re: [Patch v4 9/9] arm64: Update device tree for Layerscape SoCs
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2016 14:39:21 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAOesGMjg3XNrVESr+fS-D5HkwVZEx+ng8TCUriRyohCu0NvJAQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160829080530.GA25468@nazgul.tnic>
On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 1:05 AM, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 02:34:48PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
>> Is it mandatory to have DTS changes go with driver part altogether?
>
> Yes, because the EDAC driver needs them to even load properly.
>
>> Otherwise, I prefer to have them go through separate tree.
>
> Any particular reason why you prefer that?
>
> We've been doing this for other ARM EDAC drivers already and there were
> no issues whatsoever.
DT changes need to go through arm-soc. It's how we've been operating
for several years now.
It can be a huge pain when DT patches get merged through driver trees
and others are also modifying those files. Don't do it. You don't know
if someone else out there is changing these files, that's why we have
maintainers who own them and coordinate the changes.
If there are special circumstances such that the DT contents has to go
in with the same tree, then we can consider alternatives. But I can't
remember having one of those situations for quite a while now.
-Olof
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: olof@lixom.net (Olof Johansson)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [Patch v4 9/9] arm64: Update device tree for Layerscape SoCs
Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2016 14:39:21 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAOesGMjg3XNrVESr+fS-D5HkwVZEx+ng8TCUriRyohCu0NvJAQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160829080530.GA25468@nazgul.tnic>
On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 1:05 AM, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 02:34:48PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
>> Is it mandatory to have DTS changes go with driver part altogether?
>
> Yes, because the EDAC driver needs them to even load properly.
>
>> Otherwise, I prefer to have them go through separate tree.
>
> Any particular reason why you prefer that?
>
> We've been doing this for other ARM EDAC drivers already and there were
> no issues whatsoever.
DT changes need to go through arm-soc. It's how we've been operating
for several years now.
It can be a huge pain when DT patches get merged through driver trees
and others are also modifying those files. Don't do it. You don't know
if someone else out there is changing these files, that's why we have
maintainers who own them and coordinate the changes.
If there are special circumstances such that the DT contents has to go
in with the same tree, then we can consider alternatives. But I can't
remember having one of those situations for quite a while now.
-Olof
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-29 21:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-08-09 21:59 [Patch v4 9/9] arm64: Update device tree for Layerscape SoCs York Sun
2016-08-09 21:59 ` York Sun
2016-08-09 21:59 ` York Sun
2016-08-12 9:13 ` Borislav Petkov
2016-08-12 9:13 ` Borislav Petkov
2016-08-12 9:13 ` Borislav Petkov
2016-08-29 6:34 ` Shawn Guo
2016-08-29 6:34 ` Shawn Guo
2016-08-29 6:34 ` Shawn Guo
2016-08-29 8:05 ` Borislav Petkov
2016-08-29 8:05 ` Borislav Petkov
2016-08-29 8:33 ` Shawn Guo
2016-08-29 8:33 ` Shawn Guo
2016-08-29 8:33 ` Shawn Guo
2016-08-29 13:51 ` Borislav Petkov
2016-08-29 13:51 ` Borislav Petkov
2016-08-29 13:51 ` Borislav Petkov
2016-08-29 15:10 ` Shawn Guo
2016-08-29 15:10 ` Shawn Guo
2016-08-29 15:10 ` Shawn Guo
2016-08-29 21:39 ` Olof Johansson [this message]
2016-08-29 21:39 ` Olof Johansson
2016-08-29 21:39 ` Olof Johansson
2016-08-30 5:17 ` Borislav Petkov
2016-08-30 5:17 ` Borislav Petkov
2016-08-30 5:17 ` Borislav Petkov
2016-08-23 21:37 ` york sun
2016-08-23 21:37 ` york sun
2016-08-23 21:37 ` york sun
2016-08-30 10:57 ` Shawn Guo
2016-08-30 10:57 ` Shawn Guo
2016-08-30 15:15 ` york sun
2016-08-30 15:15 ` york sun
2016-08-30 15:15 ` york sun
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAOesGMjg3XNrVESr+fS-D5HkwVZEx+ng8TCUriRyohCu0NvJAQ@mail.gmail.com \
--to=olof@lixom.net \
--cc=Gang.Liu@nxp.com \
--cc=Mingkai.Hu@freescale.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=bhupesh.sharma@freescale.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=leoli@freescale.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-edac@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=morbidrsa@gmail.com \
--cc=oss@buserror.net \
--cc=rajesh.bhagat@freescale.com \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=shawnguo@kernel.org \
--cc=stuart.yoder@nxp.com \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=yangbo.lu@freescale.com \
--cc=yao.yuan@nxp.com \
--cc=york.sun@nxp.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.