Anson Huang Best Regards! > -----Original Message----- > From: Fabio Estevam [mailto:festevam@xxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Monday, July 2, 2018 9:00 AM > To: Anson Huang <anson.huang@xxxxxxx> > Cc: Shawn Guo <shawnguo@xxxxxxxxxx>; Robin Gong <yibin.gong@xxxxxxx>; > Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@xxxxxxx>; open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND > FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS <devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; > linux-kernel <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Rob Herring > <robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>; dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@xxxxxxx>; Sascha Hauer > <kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@xxxxxxx>; > moderated list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE > <linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] ARM: dts: imx6sl-evk: keep sw4 always on > > Hi Anson, > > On Sun, Jul 1, 2018 at 9:57 PM, Anson Huang <anson.huang@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Just want to know how to handle such case? The kernel patch will never > > be applied or is there any way to make kernel patch and dtb patch > > applied together to avoid any breakage? > > We always want to avoid breaking a working dtb when it is used with a newer > kernel. > > In this case we need to revert the kernel patch as it causes regression with old > dtbs. So that mean such kind of kernel patch will never be into kernel? Even if it is a necessary patch for fixing some other issues? I just wonder how this case being handled. Anson. ��.n��������+%������w��{.n����z�{��ܨ}���Ơz�j:+v�����w����ޙ��&�)ߡ�a����z�ޗ���ݢj��w�f
