From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A11CC433FE for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 11:07:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 648002072E for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 11:07:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728671AbgG0LHg (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Jul 2020 07:07:36 -0400 Received: from mout.kundenserver.de ([212.227.17.13]:45915 "EHLO mout.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726885AbgG0LHe (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Jul 2020 07:07:34 -0400 Received: from mail-qv1-f42.google.com ([209.85.219.42]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (mreue108 [212.227.15.145]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1N5VLY-1ksLsH2eE6-0170OO; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 13:07:31 +0200 Received: by mail-qv1-f42.google.com with SMTP id s15so2778448qvv.7; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 04:07:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533HndIsn7C3eJfJtiaRP6SJnOrlJpjKhwuyUJbBR8t7Ul8IEshi WTie9KP6tuSWckZzxlidtav9DErxuzLgBbq74+Y= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzxOngJK6stFBNtdHenz0ykV74orh0S+FvohVN1V01bLg69miZWGOg43PNVNxMAXwrpCMzVbqT41VdOkXRTOnM= X-Received: by 2002:ad4:4c09:: with SMTP id bz9mr20821335qvb.210.1595848050219; Mon, 27 Jul 2020 04:07:30 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200727084211.6632-1-lars.povlsen@microchip.com> <20200727095009.GK4073@piout.net> <87v9i9fdy7.fsf@soft-dev15.microsemi.net> In-Reply-To: <87v9i9fdy7.fsf@soft-dev15.microsemi.net> From: Arnd Bergmann Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2020 13:07:14 +0200 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/10] Adding support for Microchip Sparx5 SoC To: Lars Povlsen List-Id: Cc: Alexandre Belloni , SoC Team , Stephen Boyd , Linus Walleij , Steen Hegelund , Microchip Linux Driver Support , Olof Johansson , Michael Turquette , DTML , linux-clk , "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" , Linux ARM , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:VQrKRxNjIjvZRIEeCkAz30oJy/i+x4XOwSIIe22zj3vGPVX3xwW B8VT/nfb1I30p30rKj0Uuy9yjvkMzVHBSgnUOQ8npY2A/JwnN1j3vnSOhJadJa8D1e4ebjg I5kbFM46k8uMAK3FbSb8Jv819zX3TKO1LSnoASLFe4nDLMzVfbJdHE/4mYjvR6obfUWNR7X aSsD2jCdSZREqoHIzpZkg== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:zn333mraLCU=:K6u21uNyZfQWEhNs0LPmaG 0QCJBEOZ3RHArxr3HqpP347CBeQvh3hlTODTwJxmnRvFvGZ8ZC3nA2LalvBrtIG2zFi8KzpaN SZmj4R24ZiRSpzYnPD8kUTwSOd1k4MXTT3FMsVt77CCxkf6iHzGBV22Z2EWxJVi2erzNFDfNO 0eiJIJ0yo3dmThIQ0abPzum8M+hdaRITncovfY8fjijsYbx1FDCYKQLSbwyW51S3zK7loORi5 8YHUMa/7GsGpoWBz3kZuzBr/+hXtNhWVZwJ+EF/SOn/u3wsx9nG9inHenmkYryeC5I8+2efaX L3C4ReXq3CI522YkCfzs3BTqUJDdydCcIKWUNQM/HzEusSDq+31rpDIF6KHfw1vCB+VYUB9HM 9iL9MWFBF2j5DFT78ON2EvgsUdNhr4NOMZsTXbTj1vENSSHGmj4Vu/eajf4xsgx8f1nEgoG5L Ymc3I2fd3BLbSvwyoqMbxJrJSyjBaimXZzZ2G7r44JdxJFY96bIz2qhGWdZ0aWDKbQhs/ScQz yFq6jVAA0a3KyZAJwCPBHbQAgds95ppbuzCtG1ro8g07kYeqnhZWYjJrwcsYfWiaiwEMZLCap ff8gz2HZvFv1I39IqObBJKTUNGMFfvCUEcK44Vf0MnNAU1+hzHWGqklYTkARxbmGZlbjsCb0P w01HN5rJK1vMXhwEIlEr68wo90nTUSDYpRfn7sJL3UfRv9MeafJ4iU9p3zRle7tQyopNx3NAO fTxMCBNz5Brwp1GOpvZIqSKTroFsw5AE7uAjLbNzAyS++7/KOE3aOY6qDoFiyqB9Kr4okwC/U uJggSSGGIp1oBJ2CyHQdrk6AIntMvQX/V9yrvNh4398Rs0/TWswyhblAjJEkPulvDEyS0tYlm 8cZ5PKBg0dTaHVi4HwJ72TmgnuZJIATMfSDgujwO9QGCOgSaVSsSS/t7frgautm6I+wBraBmm uzHiAaQiyByeq6hm1akvyrg2RktphnyECXJgpW3RtidbAg5PMCVc/ Sender: linux-gpio-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 12:30 PM Lars Povlsen wrote: > Alexandre Belloni writes: > > As Arnd stated, he already applied the patches so you have to send an > > incremental patch to fix the clock driver. > > > > I actually wrote Arnd about this specifically, and he replied that a > patch against either next or mainline was fine - so that's why I > refreshed the lot (Including Reviewed-by: headers). I think I misunderstood your question. To clarify: Alexandre is right, you should not resend patches that have already been merged but instead send the incremental patches if you need further changes. I thought your question was about the case where your patch series has conflicts against another unrelated set of changes that may have been merged already. > But I will send an incremental patch just in case, no problem. Thanks, Arnd