On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 05:09:47PM +0000, Andre Przywara wrote: > Hi, > > On 20/03/18 14:13, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 04:27:36PM +0100, Harald Geyer wrote: > >>> together with all the patches but the > >>> PWM (so I had to drop the backlight node as well). > >>> > >>> Please coordinate with Andre about who should send the PWM support. > >> > >> Seems the patch got broken because only the backlight node but not the > >> pwm node was removed. Anyway, since Andre has already sent an updated > >> version of his series, maybe just revert the broken patch, merge his > >> series and then apply the original teres-i patch again? > > > > Unfortunately, there's dependencies on the PWM driver itself, and the > > maintainer hasn't replied yet. > > But those dependencies are purely "administrative", not technical, > aren't they? As the existing driver worked already with the DT changes, > it's just the listing of the compatible strings in the binding doc that > is missing? IIRC we added those later on in the past already. > > So I think it's safe to merge them independently: > "[PATCH v2 1/4] pwm: sun4i: drop unused .has_rdy member" and > "[PATCH v2 2/4] pwm: sun4i: simplify controller mapping" are > PWM fixes and go via Thierry, I guess. > > "[PATCH v2 3/4] dt-bindings: pwm: sunxi: add new compatible strings" is > just Documentation of existing behaviour, and independent from 1/4 and 2/4. > > "[PATCH v2 4/4] dts: sunxi: A64: Add PWM controllers" just "softly" > depends on the introduction of the compatible strings in 3/4, but has no > real technical dependency. It can go in any time on its own without > breaking the build or functionality. > > Or am I too sloppy here? As far as I know, Thierry never commented on any version of these patches, so I'd still like to get his review first. Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Bootlin (formerly Free Electrons) Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
