On Tue, 15 Nov 2022 11:03:24 +0100 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: Hi, > On 15/11/2022 07:01, Jernej Škrabec wrote: > > Dne četrtek, 10. november 2022 ob 08:35:39 CET je Vinod Koul napisal(a): > >> On 06-11-22, 15:48, Andre Przywara wrote: > >>> From: Icenowy Zheng <uwu@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>> > >>> The F1C100s SoC has one USB OTG port connected to a MUSB controller. > >>> > >>> Add support for its USB PHY. > >> > >> This does not apply for me, please rebase and resend > >> > >> Also, consider splitting phy patches from this. I dont think there is > >> any dependency > > > > DT patches in this series depend on functionality added here. > > > > DTS always goes separately from driver changes because it is a hardware > description. Depending on driver means you have potential ABI break, so > it is already a warning sign. We understand that ;-) What Jernej meant was that the DTS patches at the end depend on patch 01/10, which adds to the PHY binding doc. I am not sure if Vinod's suggestion was about splitting off 01/10, 03/10, and 10/10, or just the two latter which touch the driver. I can split off 03/10 and 10/10, rebased on top of linux-phy.git/next, and send that to Vinod. Then I would keep 01/10 in a respin of this series here, to satisfy the dependency of the later DTS patches, and Vinod can pick that one patch from there? Cheers, Andre
