Re: [PATCH v2] dt-bindings: qcom,pdc: convert to YAML

["Luca Weiss" <luca.weiss@fairphone.com>]

Hi Krzysztof,

On Mon May 16, 2022 at 12:35 PM CEST, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 16/05/2022 09:45, Luca Weiss wrote:
> > Hi Krzysztof,
> > 
> > On Mon May 9, 2022 at 10:40 AM CEST, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >> On 09/05/2022 10:38, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >>> On 03/01/2022 08:43, Luca Weiss wrote:
> >>>> Convert the PDC interrupt controller bindings to YAML.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Luca Weiss <luca.weiss@fairphone.com>
> >>>> Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>
> >>>> ---
> >>>> Changes since v1:
> >>>> * Adjust description of second reg-name as suggested by Maulik Shah
> >>>>
> >>>> @Rob Herring: Hope it's ok to keep your R-b given the above changes
> >>>>
> >>>> This patch depends on the following patch, which fixed sm8250 & sm8350
> >>>> compatibles and adds sm6350.
> >>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20211213082614.22651-4-luca.weiss@fairphone.com/
> >>>
> >>> Reviewed-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
> >>>
> >>> Luca,
> >>> I think this needs resending as dependency was merged. Alternatively,
> >>> maybe Bjorn could pick it up through QCom SoC?
> >>
> >> Correction - it seems that Rob took the dependency in April, so this
> >> should go via Rob's tree as well.
> >>
> >> Luca, can you resend without Rob's Review tag and ask him to pick it up?
> >>
> > 
> > So... since torvalds/master my sm6350 patch is merged through Rob's
>
> If it was merged to torvalds/master, it's not a dependency anymore...

Yeah of course, but currently sm6350 and sm8150 patches are lined up to
be merged in the next merge window from different trees which just make
it difficult.

>
> > tree, but there was also a sm8150 patch applied through Linus Walleij's
> > tree. This means (as far as I understand) that neither can really
> > properly apply this (rebased) patch as one tree will have missed the
> > other commit.
>
> sm8150 patch is also a dependency?

I mean either this conversion patch includes sm8150 or it doesn't but
given it's applied to some tree and lined up for the next merge window
it should probably include it?

>
> > 
> > Does it make sense to send a v3 rebased on linux-next now, or wait until
> > this has settled down in torvalds's tree?
>
> Conflicts can be resolved, you just need to choose one tree to based on.

If conflict resolution will be done when merging Linus' and Rob's tree
(e.g. add sm8150 to the yaml) then this v2 can be applied to Rob's tree
now.

Otherwise, I'll just wait until everything's merged into torvald's tree
so the issue disappears.

Regards
Luca

>
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof