On 4/29/24 10:57 PM, Luiz Augusto von Dentz wrote:
Hi Marek,
Hello Luiz,
On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 4:44 PM Marek Vasut <marex@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On 4/29/24 8:22 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On 29/04/2024 17:10, Marek Vasut wrote:
On 3/19/24 6:41 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On 19/03/2024 05:20, Marek Vasut wrote:
CYW43439 is a Wi-Fi + Bluetooth combo device from Infineon.
The Bluetooth part is capable of Bluetooth 5.2 BR/EDR/LE .
This chip is present e.g. on muRata 1YN module.
Extend the binding with its DT compatible using fallback
compatible string to "brcm,bcm4329-bt" which seems to be
the oldest compatible device. This should also prevent the
growth of compatible string tables in drivers. The existing
block of compatible strings is retained.
Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <marex@xxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx>
Is there any action necessary from me to get this applied ?
I recommend resending with proper PATCH prefix matching net-next
expectations.
I don't think bluetooth is net-next , it has its own ML and its own
'Bluetooth:' subject prefix. Its patchwork.k.o project also doesn't seem
to contain many patches with 'net'/'net-next' prefix. Also DT bindings
do not seem to use it per 'git log
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/bluetooth/'. But the bot is
complaining about the prefix. Hence my confusion.
Well usually we require Bluetooth: prefix to indicate this patch is
for bluetooth/bluetooth-next trees, or you can do via subject e.g.
[bluetooth-next v1...] otherwise it could be merged via other trees.
Thank you for clarification. Hopefully the V3 is better.
