On Fri, Jul 28, 2023 at 06:04:43PM +0200, Miquel Raynal wrote: > Hi Conor, > > conor@xxxxxxxxxx wrote on Fri, 28 Jul 2023 16:50:24 +0100: > > > On Fri, Jul 28, 2023 at 01:32:12PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > > On 28/07/2023 12:22, Varshini Rajendran wrote: > > > > This patch series adds support for the new SoC family - sam9x7. > > > > - The device tree, configs and drivers are added > > > > - Clock driver for sam9x7 is added > > > > - Support for basic peripherals is added > > > > - Target board SAM9X75 Curiosity is added > > > > > > > > > > Your threading is absolutely broken making it difficult to review and apply. > > > > I had a chat with Varshini today, they were trying to avoid sending the > > patches to a massive CC list, but didn't set any in-reply-to header. > > For the next submission whole series could be sent to the binding & > > platform maintainers and the individual patches additionally to their > > respective lists/maintainers. Does that sound okay to you, or do you > > think it should be broken up? > > I usually prefer receiving the dt-bindings *and* the driver changes, so > I can give my feedback on the description side, as well as looking at > the implementation and see if that really matches what was discussed > with you :) Right, that is what I was suggesting. Respective maintainers would get the drivers *and* bindings for their subsystems - IOW, each patch is sent to what get_maintainer.pl outputs for it.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
