On 13/12/2021 12:31, Sam Protsenko wrote: > On Mon, 13 Dec 2021 at 13:00, Krzysztof Kozlowski > <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On 04/12/2021 20:57, Sam Protsenko wrote: >>> USI control is now extracted to the dedicated USI driver. Remove USI >>> related code from serial driver to avoid conflicts and code duplication. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> Changes in v3: >>> - Spell check fixes in commit message >>> >>> Changes in v2: >>> - (none) >>> >>> drivers/tty/serial/samsung_tty.c | 36 ++++---------------------------- >>> include/linux/serial_s3c.h | 9 -------- >>> 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 41 deletions(-) >>> >> >> Hi Sam, >> >> Does this patch depend on USI driver? In cover letter you did not >> mention any dependency, so this can go via Greg's tree, right? >> > > Hi Krzysztof, > > TL;DR: Serial patches from this series don't really depend on USI > driver and can go via Greg's tree. > > I'd say ideally those should be applied right after USI driver > patches. Because otherwise we'd have double initialization of USI > block (from USI driver and from serial driver), which wasn't tested > and may lead to not functional USI (though I think it should be fine). > That's why I decided to keep those in one single patch series. But if > we don't care about some short period of not tested behavior -- then > those can go via Greg's tree. I think it is fine considering that only one board will be affected and it will be already non-bisectable due to DTS/driver changes going separate branches. More important is to get USI and serial driver changes in the same kernel release, so in v5.17. Best regards, Krzysztof
