On 02/02/2024 23:28, Frank Li wrote: > On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 11:05:11AM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote: >> On Thu, 01 Feb 2024 15:22:40 -0500 Frank Li wrote: >>> dt-bindings: mmc: fsl-imx-esdhc: add iommus property >>> dt-bindings: net: fec: add iommus property >>> arm64: dts: imx8qm: add smmu node >>> arm64: dts: imx8qm: add smmu stream id information >>> >>> .../devicetree/bindings/mmc/fsl-imx-esdhc.yaml | 3 ++ >>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/fsl,fec.yaml | 3 ++ >>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8qm-ss-conn.dtsi | 6 ++++ >>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/freescale/imx8qm.dtsi | 41 ++++++++++++++++++++++ >> >> Any preference on whether all these go via a platform tree, >> or should we pick up the net patch to netdev? I guess taking >> the DTB via netdev would be the usual way to handle this? > > Supposed dt-bindings go through netdev tree. > > without dt-bindings, just DTB_CHECK warning. No strict dependence > relationship between dt-bindings doc and dts file. Please make it easier for maintainers and sent entirely independent patches for different subsystems in SEPARATE patchsets. There is no dependency here between anything. Combining it, OTOH, brings the questions about such dependency and makes it a bit more difficult to apply for each maintainer. Best regards, Krzysztof
