On Wed, 2016-06-22 at 13:45 +0800, Eddie Huang wrote: > On Tue, 2016-06-21 at 17:57 +0800, Joerg Roedel wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 08, 2016 at 05:51:01PM +0800, honghui.zhang@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > From: Honghui Zhang <honghui.zhang@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Add the dtsi node of iommu and smi for mt2701. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Honghui Zhang <honghui.zhang@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > arch/arm/boot/dts/mt2701.dtsi | 51 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 51 insertions(+) > > > > Okay, I pushed my arm/mediatek branch to my tree at > > > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/joro/iommu.git > > > > Please base the patch on that branch and re-send. > > > > I think it is better let Mediatek SoC maintainer Matthias to accept dtsi > patch like other drivers. This can avoid dtsi conflict. As I > remember,last time MT8173 IOMMU dtsi patch accepted in iommu tree and > mt8173.dtsi had conflict with arm soc tree at the merge window. Honghui > should resend this patch to Matthias, and elaborate your dependency with > clock and power domain dtsi, then Matthias know the merge sequence. > Thanks, Eddie. Hi, Joerg, This one is based on CCF "arm: dts: mt2701: Add clock controller device nodes"[1] and power domain patch "Mediatek MT2701 SCPSYS power domain support v7"[2], But these two patchset are still being review now. Do you think it's better that I send this one later after ccf and power domain patch got merged, and let Matthias take it? Thanks. [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9109081 [2] http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-mediatek/2016-May/005429.html > Eddie > Thanks > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
